Selecting Food Entries

Labouffecestbon
Labouffecestbon Posts: 182 Member
edited November 17 in Food and Nutrition
I eat pretty close to TDEE, so the wrong entry on a high caloric item easily makes a huge difference in my weekly deficit, especially if it's a frequent item in my diet.

I'm usually pretty good at spotting correct entries (for ex, I prioritize entries with drop down options that seem to be from the nutritiondata website). Just curious how you guys select entries when some defer a lot from each other.

For example, I love having a piece of ribeye steak (lean and fat) with a salad. However, there are so many options, I'm not sure I've been going with the right now. And going with the wrong one can make as much as a 200 cal difference! Aïe! :s

How would you select the entry with that case? Just bid on the highest number?

Replies

  • tibby531
    tibby531 Posts: 717 Member
    look for one that has "usda" in the name. I cross-reference new-to-diary foods with nutritiondata.com all the time. it's a bit of a hassle, but I think it's worth it.
  • Babygurl721
    Babygurl721 Posts: 10 Member
    Good question cause I was having the same problwm and wanted to know which on to pick also.
  • BernadetteChurch
    BernadetteChurch Posts: 2,210 Member
    edited April 2015
    Look for the entries that don't have an asterisk next to them. These are MFP entered based on USDA data. Most of the basics are there - fruit, veg, meat, butter, sugar, etc.

    I use these entries all the time as I figure a carrot is a carrot no matter which shop I buy it from. Processed foods I always work from the packaging and fix any incorrect entries as I go along.
  • Labouffecestbon
    Labouffecestbon Posts: 182 Member
    BernadetteChurch wrote: »
    Look for the entries that don't have an asterisk next to them. These are MFP entered based on USDA data. Most of the basics are there - fruit, veg, meat, butter, sugar, etc.

    I use these entries all the time as I figure a carrot is a carrot no matter which shop I buy it from. Processed foods I always work from the packaging and fix any incorrect entries as I go along.
    I find that's easier to do with such general items. Got no problem with that.
    I also scan packages and always double check (coz some ppl are just so lazy they don't enter all the info).

    In the case of the steak, I searched "beef ribeye steak raw lean fat" and didn't find any ribeye without asterisk. If I'm looking at the wrong place or searching incorrectly, I certainly would appreciate any correction!
  • Labouffecestbon
    Labouffecestbon Posts: 182 Member
    edited April 2015
    tibby531 wrote: »
    look for one that has "usda" in the name. I cross-reference new-to-diary foods with nutritiondata.com all the time. it's a bit of a hassle, but I think it's worth it.
    It IS worth it. I do that too.
    Perhaps I should go on the site now and search for ribeye steak. Now, THAT, I haven't done.

    ETA: I just did. No ribeye steak. Chuck, sirloin, round...but not rib.
    Just want to know what you guys do in such cases...
  • CM9178
    CM9178 Posts: 1,251 Member
    if you still can't find it in the database (I've found meats are very difficult to locate correctly), search for it here: http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/search and then create your own custom entry.
  • Labouffecestbon
    Labouffecestbon Posts: 182 Member
    CM9178 wrote: »
    if you still can't find it in the database (I've found meats are very difficult to locate correctly), search for it here: http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/search and then create your own custom entry.
    Thanks for the link.

    I can't find an entry that takes the fat into account so I might have to increase calories to make up for it.
  • dawnna76
    dawnna76 Posts: 987 Member
    I crossed referenced all my foods i regularly eat with calories king and measure everything in grams to find the most accurate. it took time in the beginning but now i just have to hit add cause i tend to eat the same things for breakfast and lunch daily and dinners is usually the same mostly with few changes here and there.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories