Taco meats
Replies
-
This content has been removed.
-
Carnitas are made made slowly cooking park in rendered fat (lard) until the outer is crispy and the inner is tender. Probably the highest calorie option, also my favorite!
Oh gawd, so hungry now.
Just enjoy the meal and get what you want!0 -
I'll be going to my favorite hole in the wall taco place for dinner tomorrow and was wondering if any type of taco meat is a lot worse calorie wise than others. I generally get lengua, al pastor, carne asada and carnitas. They all taste great to me so if any of these is more of a calorie bomb than others, I won't get that (or so many of them).
Also, do you think 4 street sized tacos with two tortillas are worse calorie wise or a burrito?
Since burritos are not well known in Mexico ( only in border areas up North ) I stick with tacos and as many people do here ( in South Central Mexico; Mexico City specifically ) only eat a taco with one tortilla. That does not diminish the flavor but saves for four standard size corn tortillas 220 calories. I would not worry so much about the meat, because the calories ( unless you eat pechuga de pollo asado only ) are pretty much the same as far as calories are concerned.0 -
Since burritos are not well known in Mexico ( only in border areas up North ) I stick with tacos and as many people do here ( in South Central Mexico; Mexico City specifically ) only eat a taco with one tortilla. That does not diminish the flavor but saves for four standard size corn tortillas 220 calories. I would not worry so much about the meat, because the calories ( unless you eat pechuga de pollo asado only ) are pretty much the same as far as calories are concerned.
It's "date night" 'round these parts and this topic made me want tacos...your post just made my day
0 -
Tacos are delicious. Lengua is usually really fatty since its beef tongue, Al pastor and carnitas are slightly fatty, and carne asada is usually pretty lean. I would search the database for representative calories for each type. I'm imaging that the carne asada tacos will be your best bet calorie wise, at around 250-300 cal/taco.
Actually tongue is not a fatty meat, because it is all muscle.
0 -
Fish tacos are delicious. Just sayin'.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
BobbiTracey wrote: »LiveLaughLoveEat1 wrote: »BobbiTracey wrote: »Many people eat less during the week and eat more during the weekends, "saving" those calories for the weekend so they end up at goal on average for the week. As long as you aren't being extreme about it, there is nothing wrong with that approach. You do not need to eat to a daily goal.
I myself eat to a weekly goal and am under some days and well over some days. And I've maintained for 3 years doing that.
Yeah, I get that. But MFP bases itself around daily goals, rather than weekly. So to me it just seems like a way around the system, because if MFP was meant to work like that, then we'd have weekly goals instead of daily ones. But hey, what might not work for me may well work for others, as proven in your case.
did you realize that the exercise goals were weekly also, like the food goals?
Food goals are daily. That's why we have daily calorie limits etc. It's to measure you calorie intake on a day to day basis. That is how MFP works. Yeah, you might have a graph that displays how many calories you have consumed per week, but the main feature on this site (logging) is based around daily goals, not weekly.
The main feature logging is based on goals that are daily and weekly. Hence why it breaks it down for us. Is weight loss based on daily figures?
Are you telling me that myself along with many others that have been here for years have been doing it wrong?[/quote]
This is absolutely true.
I meticulously logged my intake for 8 weeks. 4 days a week I was under, and 3 days I was over. The daily average was less than my goal. I lost weight--more than I thought I would actually. So...yeah, it works.
ETA: Ok, seriously, why are the quotes broken?!
0 -
Some_Watery_Tart wrote: »BobbiTracey wrote: »LiveLaughLoveEat1 wrote: »BobbiTracey wrote: »Many people eat less during the week and eat more during the weekends, "saving" those calories for the weekend so they end up at goal on average for the week. As long as you aren't being extreme about it, there is nothing wrong with that approach. You do not need to eat to a daily goal.
I myself eat to a weekly goal and am under some days and well over some days. And I've maintained for 3 years doing that.
Yeah, I get that. But MFP bases itself around daily goals, rather than weekly. So to me it just seems like a way around the system, because if MFP was meant to work like that, then we'd have weekly goals instead of daily ones. But hey, what might not work for me may well work for others, as proven in your case.
did you realize that the exercise goals were weekly also, like the food goals?
Food goals are daily. That's why we have daily calorie limits etc. It's to measure you calorie intake on a day to day basis. That is how MFP works. Yeah, you might have a graph that displays how many calories you have consumed per week, but the main feature on this site (logging) is based around daily goals, not weekly.
The main feature logging is based on goals that are daily and weekly. Hence why it breaks it down for us. Is weight loss based on daily figures?
Are you telling me that myself along with many others that have been here for years have been doing it wrong?
This is absolutely true.
I meticulously logged my intake for 8 weeks. 4 days a week I was under, and 3 days I was over. The daily average was less than my goal. I lost weight--more than I thought I would actually. So...yeah, it works.
ETA: Ok, seriously, why are the quotes broken?!
[/quote]
I can't follow the conversations.0 -
I only use MFP as a convenient way to look up and record the calories I eat and I like the message boards. I don't bother recording exercise and ignore the suggested calorie it gives me as I have already calculated my goal calories using other methods. MFP is just a tool, I use it how I like. It is not a magic, nor the only, formula for weight loss. Before the days of MFP, I used to google the calorie content of foods I ate and record it all with pen and paper...
Plus after talking so much about tacos, I want tacos for dinner today now! Some tuna will just have to tie me over.0 -
LiveLaughLoveEat1 wrote: »BobbiTracey wrote: »LiveLaughLoveEat1 wrote: »BobbiTracey wrote: »Many people eat less during the week and eat more during the weekends, "saving" those calories for the weekend so they end up at goal on average for the week. As long as you aren't being extreme about it, there is nothing wrong with that approach. You do not need to eat to a daily goal.
I myself eat to a weekly goal and am under some days and well over some days. And I've maintained for 3 years doing that.
Yeah, I get that. But MFP bases itself around daily goals, rather than weekly. So to me it just seems like a way around the system, because if MFP was meant to work like that, then we'd have weekly goals instead of daily ones. But hey, what might not work for me may well work for others, as proven in your case.
did you realize that the exercise goals were weekly also, like the food goals?
Food goals are daily. That's why we have daily calorie limits etc. It's to measure you calorie intake on a day to day basis. That is how MFP works. Yeah, you might have a graph that displays how many calories you have consumed per week, but the main feature on this site (logging) is based around daily goals, not weekly.
I LOVE It...to be 19 years old and know everything...wow...I'm in awe of you![/quote]
Wow, haha let's pump the breaks for a minute! I have never once claimed to know everything, and as the older, more knowledgeable person you should be the one guiding me if what I believe does turn out to be incorrect. This is only what I believe. If you think that's wrong, then that's totally fine. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and if you think that having an opinion is being a 'know it all', then that is your opinion 0 -
Some_Watery_Tart wrote: »BobbiTracey wrote: »LiveLaughLoveEat1 wrote: »BobbiTracey wrote: »Many people eat less during the week and eat more during the weekends, "saving" those calories for the weekend so they end up at goal on average for the week. As long as you aren't being extreme about it, there is nothing wrong with that approach. You do not need to eat to a daily goal.
I myself eat to a weekly goal and am under some days and well over some days. And I've maintained for 3 years doing that.
Yeah, I get that. But MFP bases itself around daily goals, rather than weekly. So to me it just seems like a way around the system, because if MFP was meant to work like that, then we'd have weekly goals instead of daily ones. But hey, what might not work for me may well work for others, as proven in your case.
did you realize that the exercise goals were weekly also, like the food goals?
Food goals are daily. That's why we have daily calorie limits etc. It's to measure you calorie intake on a day to day basis. That is how MFP works. Yeah, you might have a graph that displays how many calories you have consumed per week, but the main feature on this site (logging) is based around daily goals, not weekly.
The main feature logging is based on goals that are daily and weekly. Hence why it breaks it down for us. Is weight loss based on daily figures?
Are you telling me that myself along with many others that have been here for years have been doing it wrong?
This is absolutely true.
I meticulously logged my intake for 8 weeks. 4 days a week I was under, and 3 days I was over. The daily average was less than my goal. I lost weight--more than I thought I would actually. So...yeah, it works.
ETA: Ok, seriously, why are the quotes broken?!
I can't follow the conversations. [/quote]
Yeah I get you guys and thanks for clarifying it for me. No, I don't believe that weight loss is based purely on day to day figures, but I think having an accurate tally of calorie intake/limits per day is important. In my opinion (and to clarify for some people who don't get it, this is my own opinion) I think that 'saving' calories does not give you an accurate indication, regardless if your calorie goals add up for the week. It's nice to know that saving calories can work, but in the past it hasn't worked so well for me so I'll try again. I do appreciate the clarification from you guys.
0 -
BobbiTracey wrote: »
I think that 'saving' calories does not give you an accurate indication, regardless if your calorie goals add up for the week. It's nice to know that saving calories can work, but in the past it hasn't worked so well for me so I'll try again. I do appreciate the clarification from you guys.
If your goals add up for the week, why would it give you a less accurate indication than per day? If a shorter time period mattered in accuracy then why not have a calorie per hour goal? You can be inaccurate in logging your calories both if you are tracking weekly or if you are tracking daily. The margin of error should be similar.
A lot of people like to do lower calorie work days and higher calorie weekends because it allows participation in more social/fun things on weekends that are associated with higher calorie foods. During the work week, it is easier for us with stiff desk jobs to stick to eating pretty low calories so it is a lot more sustainable to eat this way than to try to have the same amount of calories daily.
If you want to try it, it works like this. Suppose your daily calorie goal is 1450 (so multiplied by 7 days is 10,150 calories for the week). Let's say that you know you will be eating out with friends 2 times this week and want more calories for those days. You can give yourself a goal of 1250 for five days (1250 x 5 = 6250) so you have 1950 calories on the days you go out to eat (1950x2=3900). 6250+3900=10150 which would be the same as if you had 1450 everyday that week. You can do any variation of this as long as the math averages out all your calories to the same as your daily calorie goal so you can have one high calorie day or different calories every day of the week if you wanted to. Makes your diet a lot more flexible and friendly to your friends and family.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 435 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions