Which serving size do I follow...cups or grams?

I use my food scale for better accuracy.

Always weigh your dry/solid foods.

This is something I've wondered about too. People on here usually say weigh it, it's more accurate. And that's true for weight. But what did the people who figured the calories on the package do? Did they use volume or weight? Because that's going to most affect accuracy of the calories.

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

This is something I've wondered about too. People on here usually say weigh it, it's more accurate. And that's true for weight. But what did the people who figured the calories on the package do? Did they use volume or weight? Because that's going to most affect accuracy of the calories.

Especially with shredded cheese, it usually says on the front of the package something along the lines of 1 lb/16 oz cheese. It won't say 4 cups cheese.

I had the same cheese discovery when I started weighing my food, it was a happy day since I was using less cheese than I was logging. Yay for more cheese! However, I also discovered I was way underestimating other things like some of the rolls I use for sandwiches. One roll almost always weighs more than what it says on the package. I have these ciabatta rolls I like that says 1 roll/85 grams. When I weigh the rolls they're actually anywhere between 100-120 grams. Huge difference right there.

WickedPineapple wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

This is something I've wondered about too. People on here usually say weigh it, it's more accurate. And that's true for weight. But what did the people who figured the calories on the package do? Did they use volume or weight? Because that's going to most affect accuracy of the calories.

Especially with shredded cheese, it usually says on the front of the package something along the lines of 1 lb/16 oz cheese. It won't say 4 cups cheese.

Yes, but that is packaging. Does that necessarily mean that when they were having the calories measured that they went by weight? Weight makes more sense, but we're talking about the food industry.

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

This is something I've wondered about too. People on here usually say weigh it, it's more accurate. And that's true for weight. But what did the people who figured the calories on the package do? Did they use volume or weight? Because that's going to most affect accuracy of the calories.

The people who did the testing would have weighed it. They are required to follow scientific standards.

They're using regulated testing standards, and since mass is a scientific standard of measure that is the most easily obtainable specifically for solids, that would be used. Scales can easily be calibrated using a verified known mass (once a year, they can have someone come in with an approved cylinder with a mass of 1 kg, plop that on the scale and hit the "calibrate" button - that's what we did at the materials testing lab I worked at). Of course, your own home scale won't be monitored like that... but any amount it's off is likely negligible, and if it isn't you'll notice (OMG, this piece of cheese looks huge! Why does my scale still say it's only 10g?).

For example... take brown sugar. If the testers used volume to measure, they wouldn't know how much they actually had. The cup they would use to measure the substance would have to be sized appropriately based on the substance's density. So even though the lab would probably only own one size of measuring cup, they wouldn't be able to know how much brown sugar they actually have. If they packed in the brown sugar, they would need a smaller cup than a cup holding loose brown sugar in order for the actual amount to be the same - this can be easily avoided by weighing it instead. Using cups as measure would be even more complicated if you were testing more substances than just brown sugar! And the people who work in these labs are from a science background - they know of the problems with using volume instead of mass. So the scientific testing standards are created to give all labs one standard method of testing to prevent biases when testing.

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

WickedPineapple wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

This is something I've wondered about too. People on here usually say weigh it, it's more accurate. And that's true for weight. But what did the people who figured the calories on the package do? Did they use volume or weight? Because that's going to most affect accuracy of the calories.

Especially with shredded cheese, it usually says on the front of the package something along the lines of 1 lb/16 oz cheese. It won't say 4 cups cheese.

Yes, but that is packaging. Does that necessarily mean that when they were having the calories measured that they went by weight? Weight makes more sense, but we're talking about the food industry.

I guess it is measured by gram.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-do-food-manufacturers/

r5d5 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

WickedPineapple wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

This is something I've wondered about too. People on here usually say weigh it, it's more accurate. And that's true for weight. But what did the people who figured the calories on the package do? Did they use volume or weight? Because that's going to most affect accuracy of the calories.

Especially with shredded cheese, it usually says on the front of the package something along the lines of 1 lb/16 oz cheese. It won't say 4 cups cheese.

Yes, but that is packaging. Does that necessarily mean that when they were having the calories measured that they went by weight? Weight makes more sense, but we're talking about the food industry.

I get what you're saying, but I just don't believe that a factory would have workers sitting there with measuring cups...lol it makes more sense that a machine would have a weight calculation so as to know how much to package.

Of course. The post is about packaging though.

This content has been removed.

I weigh on a food scale in ounces, right or wrong I like it

weigh solids, measure liquids

I saw a video of the two different methods. I THINK it was in the MFP blog, but cannot swear to it. anyway, they had 5 or 6 people measure flour out by the cup. Every person came up with a different weight, even when they leveled it with a knife. Of course, when they measured it by weight, they always came out the same. The difference was incredible. so, I started measuring everything by weight. When I search on MFP, I will type in "banana g" or "Brussels sprouts g" because I often get ounces or cups. Then I open up the place that says oonces and look for 1g. That helps me a lot and I feel I can trust my measurements better.

billiebutton wrote: »

Someone in one of the other threads posted a video about how inaccurate using measuring cups can be. I bought a food scale the next day. I only use a glass measuring cup or measuring spoons for liquids.

I wonder if it was the same video I saw? I usually do the same thing with the liquid as you do. That's what made me start weighing.

It always amazes me that people use a volume measurement when they want to measure weight.
Cups are a measurement of volume and as as result the weight in a cup is depends on the (bulk) density of that what is measured. Grams are a measurement of weight.