Measuring/weighing food with a digi-scale, ounces v grams

tomofnj
tomofnj Posts: 88 Member
edited November 20 in Food and Nutrition
See, now my scale ( http://goo.gl/nLmc8L ) can measure in ounces or grams, so for example if I use mfp's database and Iook up Laura's Lean Beef - 96% Lean Ground Sirloin, it shows 140 cal per 4oz or 112 grams. I haven't actually checked this but I saw another scale post and thought I'd throw it out there... if I switch the measurement units from oz to grams these number should jive, eh?

It's funny how the closer I get to my goal, the more compulsive I am to check out details like this :) Anyway, I typically measure everything in grams, even if its soupy or something. I'm guessing thats the best method, or at least most accurate?

Lastly, for the consumed cals to match the nutrition label, ie-it says x grams is x cals, they mean after cooking (unless specified pre-cooked weight), right?

Replies

  • flamingblades
    flamingblades Posts: 311 Member
    tomofnj wrote: »
    See, now my scale ( http://goo.gl/nLmc8L ) can measure in ounces or grams, so for example if I use mfp's database and Iook up Laura's Lean Beef - 96% Lean Ground Sirloin, it shows 140 cal per 4oz or 112 grams. I haven't actually checked this but I saw another scale post and thought I'd throw it out there... if I switch the measurement units from oz to grams these number should jive, eh?

    It's funny how the closer I get to my goal, the more compulsive I am to check out details like this :) Anyway, I typically measure everything in grams, even if its soupy or something. I'm guessing thats the best method, or at least most accurate?

    Lastly, for the consumed cals to match the nutrition label, ie-it says x grams is x cals, they mean after cooking (unless specified pre-cooked weight), right?

    I do my measuring after cooking unless it specifically says raw.
  • Ninkyou
    Ninkyou Posts: 6,666 Member
    I measure in grams, before cooking, unless otherwise stated.

    For example, raw chicken, packaging lists 4 oz (112g)... those 4 oz are raw. Cooked, it's 3 oz (84g).
  • weird_me2
    weird_me2 Posts: 716 Member
    tomofnj wrote: »
    See, now my scale ( http://goo.gl/nLmc8L ) can measure in ounces or grams, so for example if I use mfp's database and Iook up Laura's Lean Beef - 96% Lean Ground Sirloin, it shows 140 cal per 4oz or 112 grams. I haven't actually checked this but I saw another scale post and thought I'd throw it out there... if I switch the measurement units from oz to grams these number should jive, eh?

    It's funny how the closer I get to my goal, the more compulsive I am to check out details like this :) Anyway, I typically measure everything in grams, even if its soupy or something. I'm guessing thats the best method, or at least most accurate?

    Lastly, for the consumed cals to match the nutrition label, ie-it says x grams is x cals, they mean after cooking (unless specified pre-cooked weight), right?


    The grams and oz should match, but grams is slightly more accurate because there are roughly 28 grams in one ounce, or 7 grams in each quarter ounce so you might be over or under by a few grams compared to the ounce measurement.

    No, consumed calories generally match the nutrition label based on the product as packaged, so you will not weigh out 4 oz of cooked beef, you will weigh out 4 oz raw beef and cook it. Even if it's only 2 1/2 oz after cooking, it's still the calories of the 4 oz raw weight. Almost all food calorie information is based on as it's packaged, not as it's served, unless it specifies this (canned tuna is one that usually does this). This means that if you are eating canned veggies or beans/etc, you should measure them as they are canned, which means with the juices, etc. even if you don't consume the juices. If you don't, you end up under-counting.
  • ForeverSunshine09
    ForeverSunshine09 Posts: 966 Member
    weird_me2 wrote: »
    tomofnj wrote: »
    See, now my scale ( http://goo.gl/nLmc8L ) can measure in ounces or grams, so for example if I use mfp's database and Iook up Laura's Lean Beef - 96% Lean Ground Sirloin, it shows 140 cal per 4oz or 112 grams. I haven't actually checked this but I saw another scale post and thought I'd throw it out there... if I switch the measurement units from oz to grams these number should jive, eh?

    It's funny how the closer I get to my goal, the more compulsive I am to check out details like this :) Anyway, I typically measure everything in grams, even if its soupy or something. I'm guessing thats the best method, or at least most accurate?

    Lastly, for the consumed cals to match the nutrition label, ie-it says x grams is x cals, they mean after cooking (unless specified pre-cooked weight), right?


    The grams and oz should match, but grams is slightly more accurate because there are roughly 28 grams in one ounce, or 7 grams in each quarter ounce so you might be over or under by a few grams compared to the ounce measurement.

    No, consumed calories generally match the nutrition label based on the product as packaged, so you will not weigh out 4 oz of cooked beef, you will weigh out 4 oz raw beef and cook it. Even if it's only 2 1/2 oz after cooking, it's still the calories of the 4 oz raw weight. Almost all food calorie information is based on as it's packaged, not as it's served, unless it specifies this (canned tuna is one that usually does this). This means that if you are eating canned veggies or beans/etc, you should measure them as they are canned, which means with the juices, etc. even if you don't consume the juices. If you don't, you end up under-counting.
    I have always weighed the cans drained and never had an issue with that. A lot of my cans also have drained cals on them. Like corn and peas.
  • tomofnj
    tomofnj Posts: 88 Member
    Ok, lets see if I got this straight, because I think it makes a bit more sense now...

    8oz of cooked meat is many more calories than 8oz of raw meat because you lose moisture in the cooking process so the calories are more dense for the same weight. Conversely, 1/4 cup of rice should be measured before cooking, so that when it absorbs 3 times its weight in water, 1/4 cup served would be too small a portion (or way less calories).

    Meh, it's still a bit confusing.. but my goal is to truly ingrain portion sizes in my head using the scale as my guru.

    hum?
  • weird_me2
    weird_me2 Posts: 716 Member
    tomofnj wrote: »
    Ok, lets see if I got this straight, because I think it makes a bit more sense now...

    8oz of cooked meat is many more calories than 8oz of raw meat because you lose moisture in the cooking process so the calories are more dense for the same weight. Conversely, 1/4 cup of rice should be measured before cooking, so that when it absorbs 3 times its weight in water, 1/4 cup served would be too small a portion (or way less calories).

    Meh, it's still a bit confusing.. but my goal is to truly ingrain portion sizes in my head using the scale as my guru.

    hum?

    Sounds like you've got it down fine and it looks like you are on the right track. After long enough of being conscious of your food and weighing it, it does get much easier to estimate portion sizes. I don't fear eating out because I'm very good at judging food amounts because I've weighed portions enough times. I can pull out 28 grams of shredded cheese within one or two grams almost every single time and my spoonful of sour cream is almost always right at 30 grams. I do still weigh everything when I'm at home, though, because I tend to err on the side of caution when I'm not weighing food.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories