None of you log sweet potatoes?

Options
2»

Replies

  • Meganthedogmom
    Meganthedogmom Posts: 1,639 Member
    Options
    swole_elsa wrote: »
    Alatariel75 wrote: »
    lseed87 wrote: »
    I would probably just scan it

    Your vegies come with barcodes? o_0

    How convenient would that be though?!

    Some do. Say if you purchase a sack of sweet potatoes, avocados, onions, etc... it'll have a barcode on the tag.
  • shadowfax_c11
    shadowfax_c11 Posts: 1,942 Member
    Options
    I log them using the USDA-raw selection. Always weigh them before cooking. If I bake them I weigh with skin on because I eat the skin. If I roast or boil them I peel before weighing.
  • FitForL1fe
    FitForL1fe Posts: 1,872 Member
    Options
    allaboutthecake wrote: »
    I don't care for sweet potatoes, but I do like Yams. I use this one. Its correct. (I verified.): Generic - Yams by Ounce, Baked Boiled or Steamed, oz

    YAMS?!

    Friends-3_3040527k.jpg
  • arachnofobia7
    arachnofobia7 Posts: 50 Member
    Options
    http://www.nutracheck.co.uk/CaloriesIn/Product/Search?desc=sweet+potatoe
    boomhower1820 wrote: »
    arachnofobia7 wrote: »
    For this very reason I stopped logging on MFP, it takes way too long to find the correct item and the measurement units are ridiculous!!! How do you quantify ''cup'' or ''serving''? I found an external website that provides nutritional values measured either by grams or mililiters (not cups, teaspoons etc) and use it instead MFT. Very often all I use as guidance is packaging information to determine calorific value.

    what do you use?


    http://www.nutracheck.co.uk/CaloriesIn/Product/Search?desc=sweet+potatoe

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    Ninkyou wrote: »
    wahoowad wrote: »
    OK. Now what? 0 confirmations, all user contributed.

    WmxnKvp.png

    AAhk3TW.png

    This. When logging whole foods rather than specific products, always go for the non-asterisk entry if possible (and if you don't have time to check yourself). Not only is it more reliably accurate (it's USDA info input by MFP), but it's usually got the various data on nutrients like potassium filled in.
  • shadowfax_c11
    shadowfax_c11 Posts: 1,942 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    This. When logging whole foods rather than specific products, always go for the non-asterisk entry if possible (and if you don't have time to check yourself). Not only is it more reliably accurate (it's USDA info input by MFP), but it's usually got the various data on nutrients like potassium filled in.

    It sure would be nice if MFP database automatically displayed all non-asterisk items at the top of the list. Sometimes it is a huge PITA to scroll through to find them.

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    shadowfax_c11 wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    This. When logging whole foods rather than specific products, always go for the non-asterisk entry if possible (and if you don't have time to check yourself). Not only is it more reliably accurate (it's USDA info input by MFP), but it's usually got the various data on nutrients like potassium filled in.

    It sure would be nice if MFP database automatically displayed all non-asterisk items at the top of the list. Sometimes it is a huge PITA to scroll through to find them.

    I could not agree more.
  • FitForL1fe
    FitForL1fe Posts: 1,872 Member
    Options
    shadowfax_c11 wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    This. When logging whole foods rather than specific products, always go for the non-asterisk entry if possible (and if you don't have time to check yourself). Not only is it more reliably accurate (it's USDA info input by MFP), but it's usually got the various data on nutrients like potassium filled in.

    It sure would be nice if MFP database automatically displayed all non-asterisk items at the top of the list. Sometimes it is a huge PITA to scroll through to find them.

    yeah or figuring out the right combination of search terms to get the right result to show

    annoying as *kitten*
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    edited June 2015
    Options
    Ninkyou wrote: »
    wahoowad wrote: »
    OK. Now what? 0 confirmations, all user contributed.

    WmxnKvp.png

    AAhk3TW.png

    I use this one!
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,725 Member
    Options
    arachnofobia7 wrote: »
    For this very reason I stopped logging on MFP, it takes way too long to find the correct item and the measurement units are ridiculous!!! How do you quantify ''cup'' or ''serving''? I found an external website that provides nutritional values measured either by grams or mililiters (not cups, teaspoons etc) and use it instead MFT. Very often all I use as guidance is packaging information to determine calorific value.

    The official non asterisk entries should have multiple serving sizes: cups, tablespoons, grams, ounces, 100g, etc. They made a change where the official MFP entry showed up at the top of results but I'm not sure I thought I heard that got broke again. Either way, once I find an item, I seem to have it almost permanently for continuous use (from my Recents area), which on the iOS app I discovered appears to store a ton of items

  • FitForL1fe
    FitForL1fe Posts: 1,872 Member
    Options
    JaneiR36 wrote: »
    arachnofobia7 wrote: »
    For this very reason I stopped logging on MFP, it takes way too long to find the correct item and the measurement units are ridiculous!!! How do you quantify ''cup'' or ''serving''? I found an external website that provides nutritional values measured either by grams or mililiters (not cups, teaspoons etc) and use it instead MFT. Very often all I use as guidance is packaging information to determine calorific value.

    The official non asterisk entries should have multiple serving sizes: cups, tablespoons, grams, ounces, 100g, etc. They made a change where the official MFP entry showed up at the top of results but I'm not sure I thought I heard that got broke again. Either way, once I find an item, I seem to have it almost permanently for continuous use (from my Recents area), which on the iOS app I discovered appears to store a ton of items

    yeah I refer to my Recent tab like 95% of the time

    searching for something new and verifying its stats sucks

    smh I don't understand how people can record so many *kitten* wrong entries into the database
  • ChrisM8971
    ChrisM8971 Posts: 1,067 Member
    Options
    bpetrosky wrote: »
    ChrisM8971 wrote: »
    Scanning only takes you to member entries these days so there is no guarantee of accuracy unfortunately and the USDA entries seem to be member entries as well. Use the entry with no * because that is an MFP site entry and should be more accurate, otherwise look for the ones with the most confirmations

    While that's true, it's getting harder and harder to find entries with no *.

    Unfortunately that is true, it seems that a lot of the entries have had their names changed recently and when you enter Banana for instance the unstarred version doesnt seem to appear at all.

    A synical part of me wonders if the search function works better on the paid for version of the site?

Categories