Japanese rice (cooked) higher in calories?

Options
slondro
slondro Posts: 45 Member
in Food and Nutrition
I'm living in Japan, and brown rice (genmai) is extremely easy to procure and prepare, so I factor it into most of my meals. It's delicious and very customizable, but I've noticed a large gap between information available in English and Japanese.

In English, 100 grams of cooked brown rice is usually listed as having about 110 calories. In Japanese, however, cooked brown rice is invariably listed as 165 calories for the same amount--a whole 50% more caloric. I'm not entirely sure what the difference is, but I do know that Japanese rice (including brown rice) is short-grain, so perhaps its nutritional composition is considerably different from what you'd find in the West (jasmine and the like).

Just to be on the safe side, I've been following the Japanese calculation when counting calories, but I'm a bit concerned that I may be unnecessarily limiting my calories and carbs.

Is anyone familiar with different kinds of rice and what may account for the difference? (For reference, 'koshihikari' is a popular type of rice, and I've been eating the brown rice version of that.)

Replies

  • joepratt503
    joepratt503 Posts: 191 Member
    Options
    Different rice is different...Basmati is less than Jasmine rice(like you said), Cal Rose is different again, etc. I assume its partly how its processed partly what kind of rice it is. I would imagine that grain to grain the rice that you get in japan may even be different genetically.

    As much as it sucks, gotta go with the nutrition value you are given :)
  • slondro
    slondro Posts: 45 Member
    Options
    joepratt503 wrote: »
    Different rice is different...Basmati is less than Jasmine rice(like you said), Cal Rose is different again, etc. I assume its partly how its processed partly what kind of rice it is. I would imagine that grain to grain the rice that you get in japan may even be different genetically.

    As much as it sucks, gotta go with the nutrition value you are given :)

    Thanks for your reply, Joe. I usually find I'm plenty full even using the higher Japanese values; I just didn't want to cheat myself out of a bunch of carbs and calories and end up binging out of desperation at some undetermined point in the future.
  • ksuh999
    ksuh999 Posts: 543 Member
    edited February 2015
    Options
    I did my own calculations for Kokuho rice, 45 grams raw = 100 grams cooked, 160 calories. Most rices are around that value if I use my rice cooker.
  • Lissa_Kaye
    Lissa_Kaye Posts: 214 Member
    Options
    I wonder if it has to do with the amount of calories in the rice hull? and it probably has more starch due to not being washed off like white rice? This is pure speculation, I really don't know. Have you tried the info at http://nutritiondata.self.com/ They give very good breakdowns on food. Sometimes you have to really look around to find the right food that you're looking for.
  • slondro
    slondro Posts: 45 Member
    Options
    Thanks ksuh and Lissa!

    Unfortunately short grain brown rice doesn't seem to be in the database on Nutrition Data, but ksuh's calculation is extremely close to what I've been finding.

    I do find that Japanese rice tends to be stickier and more glutinous, even aside from sushi rice--presumably having to do with the concentration of carbs.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,372 Member
    Options
    The rice I use has close to 200 calories for 100g cooked.

Categories