lol, mfp calorie count is so off...

Options
24

Replies

  • senecarr
    senecarr Posts: 5,377 Member
    Options
    4o8ssi0puqr1.png
  • Glinda1971
    Glinda1971 Posts: 2,328 Member
    Options
    Glinda1971 wrote: »
    Raw chicken breast is 110 calories per 100 grams.

    Cooked is 164 grams.

    I meant 164 calories. Obviously not foruming well today.
  • JoanaMHill
    JoanaMHill Posts: 265 Member
    Options
    Put in the actual brand instead of relying on a generic entry? Saves at least half the trouble. If there isn't a brand because you bought it at a farmer's market or something, then check the stats before you pick. You should do that on an entry you haven't used before anyway.
  • bpetrosky
    bpetrosky Posts: 3,911 Member
    Options
    They need a "IT'S SO WRONG IT'S STUPID" button.
  • FitForL1fe
    FitForL1fe Posts: 1,872 Member
    Options
    bpetrosky wrote: »
    They need a "IT'S SO WRONG IT'S STUPID" button.

    lol real

    I try to click No as much as possible

    I don't think it helps :confounded:
  • Dnarules
    Dnarules Posts: 2,081 Member
    Options
    OdesAngel wrote: »
    besaro wrote: »
    draznyth wrote: »
    @StrongAsFuarkBear uh yes most of us know the database has a ton of garbage entries

    it is up to you to hit the "Nutrition Info" button on a selected entry and verify the stats, or create your own entry if you cannot find an accurate one

    maybe spend less time expecting MFP to do all the work for you and put in some of your own time to verify what you put into your body


    wow, D*#& much?

    Wow, wk much? Yet the OP was mocking people with thyroid issues.

    Lol, just lol.

    I don't think OP was mocking thyroid issues. I think OP was saying that maybe the reason people often think thyroid issues are responsible for lack of weight loss is that they are eating more than they think because the database is wrong. Probably not the best way to make a point, but I don't think it was mocking.

  • bpetrosky
    bpetrosky Posts: 3,911 Member
    Options
    Let's see, I've made note to MFP since 2013 about the garbage entries and the DB and relatively simple ways they could improve it. I've worked with databases at the SQL level before so I do have a concept of things that would be easy or complex to implement. Simple filters to help users surface better entries, etc.

    The only change (except for the continued accumulation of garbage/entropy in the DB) has been this "verified" flag, which appears to have been bungled.

    *sigh*
  • rushfive
    rushfive Posts: 603 Member
    Options
    I wonder if NO is hit a number of times the entry is removed? ex. no is hit 10times they remove the entry.
    otherwise what is the point of NO.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    rushfive wrote: »
    I wonder if NO is hit a number of times the entry is removed? ex. no is hit 10times they remove the entry.
    otherwise what is the point of NO.

    Let's find out. Someone pick out a ridiculous entry, and let's all go hit "No" a few times.
  • FitForL1fe
    FitForL1fe Posts: 1,872 Member
    edited June 2015
    Options
    bpetrosky wrote: »
    Let's see, I've made note to MFP since 2013 about the garbage entries and the DB and relatively simple ways they could improve it. I've worked with databases at the SQL level before so I do have a concept of things that would be easy or complex to implement. Simple filters to help users surface better entries, etc.

    The only change (except for the continued accumulation of garbage/entropy in the DB) has been this "verified" flag, which appears to have been bungled.

    *sigh*

    lol yeah there is an API request page for developers who want to make apps which work with the MFP database

    but uhh I get paid to do *kitten* like this already so idk I'm just going to keep using my Recent list, create my own entries, and verify/downvote the *kitten* ones I see


    maybe we could start a group and get some devs in there to pull the API and work on something simple-ish together
  • snickerscharlie
    snickerscharlie Posts: 8,578 Member
    Options
    PeachyCarol wrote: »
    blankiefinder wrote: »
    MFP database is off? Shocked!

    60zqj18568ui.png

    That will never not be funny.

    Aw, come on, tomato's a fruit, right? ;)
  • Alluminati
    Alluminati Posts: 6,208 Member
    Options
    Dnarules wrote: »
    OdesAngel wrote: »
    besaro wrote: »
    draznyth wrote: »
    @StrongAsFuarkBear uh yes most of us know the database has a ton of garbage entries

    it is up to you to hit the "Nutrition Info" button on a selected entry and verify the stats, or create your own entry if you cannot find an accurate one

    maybe spend less time expecting MFP to do all the work for you and put in some of your own time to verify what you put into your body


    wow, D*#& much?

    Wow, wk much? Yet the OP was mocking people with thyroid issues.

    Lol, just lol.

    I don't think OP was mocking thyroid issues. I think OP was saying that maybe the reason people often think thyroid issues are responsible for lack of weight loss is that they are eating more than they think because the database is wrong. Probably not the best way to make a point, but I don't think it was mocking.

    Ok.
  • Alluminati
    Alluminati Posts: 6,208 Member
    Options
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    rushfive wrote: »
    I wonder if NO is hit a number of times the entry is removed? ex. no is hit 10times they remove the entry.
    otherwise what is the point of NO.

    Let's find out. Someone pick out a ridiculous entry, and let's all go hit "No" a few times.

    I always wondered why the "no" was there, too.
  • FitForL1fe
    FitForL1fe Posts: 1,872 Member
    edited June 2015
    Options
    OdesAngel wrote: »
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    rushfive wrote: »
    I wonder if NO is hit a number of times the entry is removed? ex. no is hit 10times they remove the entry.
    otherwise what is the point of NO.

    Let's find out. Someone pick out a ridiculous entry, and let's all go hit "No" a few times.

    I always wondered why the "no" was there, too.

    idk but sometimes I click it

    it's definitely there for clicking. I checked
  • snickerscharlie
    snickerscharlie Posts: 8,578 Member
    Options
    rushfive wrote: »
    I wonder if NO is hit a number of times the entry is removed? ex. no is hit 10times they remove the entry.
    otherwise what is the point of NO.

    I thought the purpose of "NO" was to give you an opportunity to edit the entry? Which I do all the time.
  • TheVirgoddess
    TheVirgoddess Posts: 4,535 Member
    Options
    You click the no and then you get the option to edit. I think that's all it does.
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Options
    StrongAsFuarkBear wrote: »
    no wonder people get stuck on "thyroid issues" here so often,

    the calorie and portioning is so off....

    Chicken breast- VERIFIED!!!! shows 110cal/100gram of chicken, not only that, but default option that comes up is (1/2 cup diced/minced), lol @ fingers dicing chicken on cutting board. unbeliveable. go by the USDA values at least for SUCH A BASIC item.

    edit: real chicken has 164 calories/100gram , skinless, boneless

    I don't know what kind of chicken you have but any raw chicken I ever had was 110-120 per 100 grams skinless.
  • Alluminati
    Alluminati Posts: 6,208 Member
    Options
    TheVirgoddess wrote: »
    You click the no and then you get the option to edit. I think that's all it does.

    I'm a bad MFP'er then because I bypass and go to the next entry hehe
  • rushfive
    rushfive Posts: 603 Member
    Options
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    rushfive wrote: »
    I wonder if NO is hit a number of times the entry is removed? ex. no is hit 10times they remove the entry.
    otherwise what is the point of NO.

    Let's find out. Someone pick out a ridiculous entry, and let's all go hit "No" a few times.

    I tried it on the greek strawberry above. It just gave me the option to "make a change" after I hit NO. ugh
    I did not change it ...... people may be using it for examples. (assume most know they meant strawberry not tomato)

Categories