Portion Size by the Handful
Replies
-
Although in fairness to my previous reply, I'm referring to PN's version of this with is very similar. The concept of using hand size to approximate portions.0
-
TimothyFish wrote: »
Thanks for proving how bad your own topic is
This is where the threads goes. Proving hands are different like no one knows that?
0 -
-
I don't think it is a bad topic. I like the idea of using hands, because you've got them there all the time and can do a quick visual comparism. Using objects like baseballs or packs of cards, means that you have to be very familiar with that object (I'm familiar with cards, but I've only a vague idea about the size of a baseball) or take one to the kitchen/table if you want to compare directly. If you don't lose weight, you can always adjust the number of portions.
I think most of the criticisms are just because this is a calorie-counting website/app, so calorie counting is going to be seen as the best method and other methods will be criticised. But I think it's down to personal taste, and what people find easier, what works for them and what they can stick with. I've found calorie counting really useful in the past, but I don't want to do it all the time - and it's difficult to be entirely accurate, anyway.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Wiseandcurious wrote: »
Agreed! Pathetic! I don't think I've ever only eaten a "dice" / "die" size portion of cheese. Was just using that as an example, really.
One dice would two dies, right?
"Dies" wouldn't be a word unless it was used in a sentence such as "He dies while eating chocolate.". Even then, "died" would be more correct . . .
0 -
"Dice" is actually the plural. "Die" is the singular. But we commonly use "dice" for singular and plural both:
http://grammarist.com/usage/dice-die/0 -
I don't think it is a bad topic. I like the idea of using hands, because you've got them there all the time and can do a quick visual comparism. Using objects like baseballs or packs of cards, means that you have to be very familiar with that object (I'm familiar with cards, but I've only a vague idea about the size of a baseball) or take one to the kitchen/table if you want to compare directly. If you don't lose weight, you can always adjust the number of portions.
I think most of the criticisms are just because this is a calorie-counting website/app, so calorie counting is going to be seen as the best method and other methods will be criticised. But I think it's down to personal taste, and what people find easier, what works for them and what they can stick with. I've found calorie counting really useful in the past, but I don't want to do it all the time - and it's difficult to be entirely accurate, anyway.
While calorie counting might be the most accurate for tracking I think that we often forget that there are many people that it is not right for.
I have a son that is OCD about anything concerning numbers. He tried for 3 months to count and track. It literally was about to drive him insane. He stopped just short of developing an eating disorder.
0 -
Might be ok for the average person who doesn't log their food.
As someone who logs food and counts calories, no way would the relative size of my hand be anywhere near accurate enough for establishing portions.
Also, I pick up really heavy things and put them back down 4 days a week and a palm sized portion of meat is not enough for me to meet my protein goals (165 to 185 grams).0 -
I think using your hand for portion control is okay on an occasional basis, but not day-to-day. I generally don't carry my food scale with me everywhere, such as restaurants and friends' homes (and even if I knew my friends had a food scale, I wouldn't ask unless it was a close friend). However, I don't eat at restaurants and friends' homes everyday; at most, it might be once or twice a month.
Also, when I started my weight loss journey, I didn't have a food scale (or even know much about them). Approximating amounts of food can work, especially when you have a lot to lose; the closer you are to goal, not so much.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
or just get a food scale and weigh all your solids…problem solved…
OP your method is extremely inaccurate.0 -
This seems like just another way for you to negate food scales. I get that for you they don't work, but using every chance you can to express how much you dislike them gets old after a while.
agree…
OP does not like foods scales so he needs to come up with a method to negate them, that is actually wildly inaccurate...0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
This seems like just another way for you to negate food scales. I get that for you they don't work, but using every chance you can to express how much you dislike them gets old after a while.
agree…
OP does not like foods scales so he needs to come up with a method to negate them, that is actually wildly inaccurate...
Yup and I'm sure he believes this method can somehow be more accurate.
so if you go out to diner should you pick up your cooked food to get a good "guestimate" of it ?0 -
if you take two people and person A follows OPs method and Person B weights their food with food scale 75% of time and guestimates the other 25% at restaurants, social gatherings, etc….who do you think will have the more accurate logging over the long term..
my money is on person B0 -
I don't think even weighing is always as accurate as people think it is. For instance, if I made a stew for a family, weighed the ingredients and weighed my portion carefully, it still might not be exact - perhaps water evaporating has changed the proportions, or I have more meat and less veg in my portion, etc. And it's well known that manufacturers' calorie counts are not always completely accurate. I think weighing gives the illusion of accuracy, but it's more of a good estimate!
Accuracy isn't terribly important to me, because I can get a measure of whether I'm on the right track by weighing myself. I know that's not going to work for everybody, but it's easy and it works. And the portions are just a guide - if one portion of meat is too small, you can double the portions. It's just an easy way to keep trackof how much you're eating and help yourself to eat the right balance of foods for you. I understand that it's not going to work for everybody (particularly if they have to lose or gain at a particular rate, or be precise about macros, etc.)0 -
I don't think even weighing is always as accurate as people think it is. For instance, if I made a stew for a family, weighed the ingredients and weighed my portion carefully, it still might not be exact - perhaps water evaporating has changed the proportions, or I have more meat and less veg in my portion, etc. And it's well known that manufacturers' calorie counts are not always completely accurate. I think weighing gives the illusion of accuracy, but it's more of a good estimate!
Accuracy isn't terribly important to me, because I can get a measure of whether I'm on the right track by weighing myself. I know that's not going to work for everybody, but it's easy and it works. And the portions are just a guide - if one portion of meat is too small, you can double the portions. It's just an easy way to keep trackof how much you're eating and help yourself to eat the right balance of foods for you. I understand that it's not going to work for everybody (particularly if they have to lose or gain at a particular rate, or be precise about macros, etc.)
what is more accurate …weighing it all out and logging it in OR guessing all the ingredients and then logging it?0 -
if you take two people and person A follows OPs method and Person B weights their food with food scale 75% of time and guestimates the other 25% at restaurants, social gatherings, etc….who do you think will have the more accurate logging over the long term..
my money is on person B
Oh you are definitely right. But you don't always need to be that accurate. The point is that what you may need to lose weight and maintain sanity and what someone else may need are two different things. I've been able to lose weight without weighing, and it works for me. I don't see anywhere that the OP has stated that using hand portions is more accurate than weighing, so really, can you please restate your point? I'm failing to see it.0 -
if you take two people and person A follows OPs method and Person B weights their food with food scale 75% of time and guestimates the other 25% at restaurants, social gatherings, etc….who do you think will have the more accurate logging over the long term..
my money is on person B
Oh you are definitely right. But you don't always need to be that accurate. The point is that what you may need to lose weight and maintain sanity and what someone else may need are two different things. I've been able to lose weight without weighing, and it works for me. I don't see anywhere that the OP has stated that using hand portions is more accurate than weighing, so really, can you please restate your point? I'm failing to see it.
My point is that OP's method is not very accurate as compared to weighing with a food scale.
My second point is that this post is a means to an end for OP to bash using food scales (which he has a history of) without actually saying that is what he is doing.
And for most people on MFP, yes, they do need to be accurate. I would say that 90% of "why am I not losing threads" are because said person is NOT weighting there food and trying to guestimate..0 -
The people who the "hand portion" guidelines are targeted to aren't likely to ever adopt a strict measuring and logging routine. We can promote that as the best way to get desired results, but there's still a large population of people who won't get it.
The people who came up with the ''hand portion" are trying to communicate a method of portion control to that part of the population who won't weigh. It's a vastly inferior method, but it can be better than nothing.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
That is why I usually put a bit over what I think I'm having. If my estimate is that I am having 2 oz of meat, I will put 2.5 or something like that. I do this with almost everything that isn't a unit or standard (like cookies or 8 oz of whole milk). People do need to be aware that not weighing is not as accurate and that the vast majority of people will underestimate. IF you're going to use a method like mine, then you should work in a cushion for human error by going over your estimates. I
I'm not all that familiar with the OP, but if you refuse to use a weight and you haven't been losing weight, then the next step is to add a certain amount to all your logs and see how that works.0 -
The people who the "hand portion" guidelines are targeted to aren't likely to ever adopt a strict measuring and logging routine. We can promote that as the best way to get desired results, but there's still a large population of people who won't get it.
The people who came up with the ''hand portion" are trying to communicate a method of portion control to that part of the population who won't weigh. It's a vastly inferior method, but it can be better than nothing.
I guess…
I mean why be accurate when you can be 'kinda sorta maybe accurate"….
it takes five seconds to weigh most foods…0 -
The OP specifically asked what people thought of it in comparison to other ways of measuring their foods, so those who are strong advocates of measuring responded in kind.
Me? I weigh some things, but not all. I weigh things that I know that I may not be all that accurate at eye balling or that I have a natural desire to overeat. The food scale is my friend in those situations. I weigh my ice cream and my nuts. I don't weigh my veggies or the veggie crumbles, etc.
I've consistently lost weight, so it works for me. If my weight loss slowed down or I was struggling, I would weigh more things and make sure my food log was locked in. Why? Because I know the most accurate way of logging and tracking your food is to weigh it. I do what works for me right now...knowing that it isn't 100% accurate, but I'm having success with it.
agree.
it is impossible to be 100% accurate all the time ..
I am off to the beach …have fun all
0 -
The people who the "hand portion" guidelines are targeted to aren't likely to ever adopt a strict measuring and logging routine. We can promote that as the best way to get desired results, but there's still a large population of people who won't get it.
The people who came up with the ''hand portion" are trying to communicate a method of portion control to that part of the population who won't weigh. It's a vastly inferior method, but it can be better than nothing.
I guess…
I mean why be accurate when you can be 'kinda sorta maybe accurate"….
it takes five seconds to weigh most foods…
For some people it represents a level of neurosis that they are not comfortable with. I can't speak for anyone esle, but personally I want to develop a system that I can use anywhere FOREVER. I'm pretty tiny so even my TDEE is only around 1300 so I need to learn what a normal portion is for me without having to rely on a scale. Like I said, that's my personal reason for doing it, so it doesn't have anything to do with my settling for a mediocre way. Then again, it's working fairly well for me right now, but if it wasn't I would reconsider.
0 -
The people who the "hand portion" guidelines are targeted to aren't likely to ever adopt a strict measuring and logging routine. We can promote that as the best way to get desired results, but there's still a large population of people who won't get it.
The people who came up with the ''hand portion" are trying to communicate a method of portion control to that part of the population who won't weigh. It's a vastly inferior method, but it can be better than nothing.
I guess…
I mean why be accurate when you can be 'kinda sorta maybe accurate"….
it takes five seconds to weigh most foods…
Again, if you're a public health official trying to communicate to the larger community you have to choose between advocating a gold standard that will be only be adopted a very small group, or a method that is "better than nothing" but can be done by a much larger group.
Personally, I always advocate to friends to try weight logging as the best option.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
The whole "hand portion" concept came out of public health agencies trying to find a easily related way to communicate some idea of portion control. They needed a method that didn't include equipment such as a kitchen scale, since their audience is likely not to have it. If you're talking to someone who has not even a beginning concept of food mass, or even volumetric measuring, the hand is probably the only benchmark you can use.
Many of the MFP users would want to progress beyond a very ham-handed (pun intended) method of measuring. Volumetric measurements are an improvement, but still inexact for very calorie dense foods like starches. With kitchen scales being very cheap (~$20 for a halfway decent one), it's a very small investment that pays big dividends for people who really want to get a handle on their intake.
Bottom line, if the hand method is working for you, that's fine. If you find yourself in the "I'm logging everything but I'm not losing" crowd, the best step you can take is to get more exact with your measurements and minimize the error.
Nice intelligent post. Its quite common for MFPers to get over excited and take general public health ideas and go to town on them.0 -
The whole "hand portion" concept came out of public health agencies trying to find a easily related way to communicate some idea of portion control. They needed a method that didn't include equipment such as a kitchen scale, since their audience is likely not to have it. If you're talking to someone who has not even a beginning concept of food mass, or even volumetric measuring, the hand is probably the only benchmark you can use.
Many of the MFP users would want to progress beyond a very ham-handed (pun intended) method of measuring. Volumetric measurements are an improvement, but still inexact for very calorie dense foods like starches. With kitchen scales being very cheap (~$20 for a halfway decent one), it's a very small investment that pays big dividends for people who really want to get a handle on their intake.
Bottom line, if the hand method is working for you, that's fine. If you find yourself in the "I'm logging everything but I'm not losing" crowd, the best step you can take is to get more exact with your measurements and minimize the error.
Nice intelligent post. Its quite common for MFPers to get over excited and take general public health ideas and go to town on them.
Thanks! Maybe I'm just too new here.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions