Just curious - do you eat the serving size or just whatever amount you want?

I eat however much I want that fits into my calories. Sometimes that's more than a 'portion', sometimes less.

I use serving sizes as a guide. But I do eat what I want and weigh it out. Also how many calories I have left after pre-logging determines more how big my serving sizes are.

I eat whatever I want to fit in my calories. Servings sizes are typically pretty small, in my opinion.

I usually don't eat a serving size exactly. But if I had to log on my phone, I'd probably try to round it up because it's more of a pain than just popping the calculator on my computer, lol.

And I'm way too lazy to make grams entries for everything. I just know the serving size in grams of pretty much everything I use by heart now.

I'm very similar. I tend to weigh out a serving size of many things, or at least a portion of a serving size, especially if it is something that is easy to hit the exact g of. If people looked through my diary, they'd probably yell at me for estimating. But in truth, I weigh it all out when possible. I have those 28g of chips, the 55g of cheerios, etc. I don't do that with meats or veggies though. I'm not about to trim my steak down just to hit 4 oz. Hands off my steak!

Here in the UK, the serving suggestion sizes can be so small.
For example, 40 grams is the suggested serving size for most Cereals.
That's like a portion for a small child! Lol
I tend to measure out my own servings.

I tend to use serving sizes for the same reason. When I first started on MFP years ago, I didn't use a scale. So I have TONS of entries that are based on serving sizes, rather than ounces or grams. So although I weigh it, I input it based on serving size. I am slowly replacing some of my common foods with the weighed entries bc I am sick of all the maths

roger1879 wrote: »

Certain foods I go by the Serving size.. others, which I kno I Can eat more of, and still stay on track, I will have more

This. I still weigh it all though.

I usually eat 2 servings of cottage cheese, which shows up on the diary entry as two 1/2 cup servings but I know is 228 grams, which I do weigh out.

Pistachios, I weigh out exactly what the label says is a serving and I forget if that's 30 g or 40 g.

For fruit, like strawberries or watermelon, I just weigh what I cut up and log it. I don't try to only have 1/2 cup (I think that's the standard serving size) of that kind of thing.

hartmamp wrote: »

I started to wonder this when I see all the critiques of folk's diaries... i.e., "it says you ate 1/4 cup of cheese, use a food scale!" Well I personally use a food scale, and know that 1/4 cup of cheese is 28g. So if I go to log it and I weighed out 28g, then I log the 1/4 cup if that's what comes up first.

But then I started to realize that I mostly aim for serving sizes because to me, it's just easier to log that way. Am I the only one that does this?

No, 1/4 cup of cheese is not always 28 grams.

Just like not all bananas are 110 calories either, and this thing about small, medium, large bananas is all in the perception.

I research to make sure I am using accurate entries and most of the time I log in grams, sometimes in ounces. I also weigh my food and never count on measuring cups/spoons for solid food because they are not accurate.

For me, it's much easier to weigh my food and ensure accurate entries, and it doesn't take any time at all.

Depending on my calorie allotment, I might eat more or less than the serving size. That's the beauty of weighing in grams--the serving size is very easy to adjust.

SLLRunner wrote: »

hartmamp wrote: »

I started to wonder this when I see all the critiques of folk's diaries... i.e., "it says you ate 1/4 cup of cheese, use a food scale!" Well I personally use a food scale, and know that 1/4 cup of cheese is 28g. So if I go to log it and I weighed out 28g, then I log the 1/4 cup if that's what comes up first.

But then I started to realize that I mostly aim for serving sizes because to me, it's just easier to log that way. Am I the only one that does this?

No, 1/4 cup of cheese is not always 28 grams.

Just like not all bananas are 110 calories either, and this thing about small, medium, large bananas is all in the perception.

I research to make sure I am using accurate entries and most of the time I log in grams, sometimes in ounces. I also weigh my food and never count on measuring cups/spoons for solid food because they are not accurate.

For me, it's much easier to weigh my food and ensure accurate entries, and it doesn't take any time at all.

Depending on my calorie allotment, I might eat more or less than the serving size. That's the beauty of weighing in grams--the serving size is very easy to adjust.

all this.

Plus I don't always eat the suggested serving size.

For example suggested serving size of chicken...skinless boneless breast...what is the suggested serving size? 4oz?

And to top it all off...froot loops...suggested serving size is 3/4 cup or 25g(guessing) but guess what 25g of froot loops is not 3/4 of a cup...no way no how...so if I logged it as 3/4 of a cup I would be under logging my calories.

I weigh and eat the portion that I want. I just use the serving size to calculate calories.

SLLRunner wrote: »

hartmamp wrote: »

I started to wonder this when I see all the critiques of folk's diaries... i.e., "it says you ate 1/4 cup of cheese, use a food scale!" Well I personally use a food scale, and know that 1/4 cup of cheese is 28g. So if I go to log it and I weighed out 28g, then I log the 1/4 cup if that's what comes up first.

But then I started to realize that I mostly aim for serving sizes because to me, it's just easier to log that way. Am I the only one that does this?

No, 1/4 cup of cheese is not always 28 grams.

Just like not all bananas are 110 calories either, and this thing about small, medium, large bananas is all in the perception.

I research to make sure I am using accurate entries and most of the time I log in grams, sometimes in ounces. I also weigh my food and never count on measuring cups/spoons for solid food because they are not accurate.

For me, it's much easier to weigh my food and ensure accurate entries, and it doesn't take any time at all.

Depending on my calorie allotment, I might eat more or less than the serving size. That's the beauty of weighing in grams--the serving size is very easy to adjust.

I took that to mean that the label on her cheese says something like Serving: 1/4 cup (28 g). So if she finds that cheese in the MFP database with the same nutrition info that is on her label, she measures 28 g and logs it. It might show up as 1/4 cup on her diary but she's actually weighed it out.

Another example, my cottage cheese comes up as Food Club - 4% milkfat cottage cheese large curd, 1/2 cup on MFP. The label on the package says the serving is 1/2 cup (114 g.) The nutrition info on MFP for Food Club - 4% milkfat cottage cheese large curd, 1/2 cup matches what is on my food label. So I measure my 114 g and log it.

I do like you do. Actually, when I have had struggles with my weight loss, I didn't come to the boards because I knew that all they would say is to open my diary and then tell me that I wasn't weighing everything. I do though! The only thing that I don't weigh consistently is bread because I don't eat a lot of it and I am always under on my calories anyway. But cheese? The cheese I use is a finely shredded blend. A serving size is 1/3 cup or 28 grams. I will set a container on my digital scale, tare it, and then weigh out exactly 28 grams. If I go over, I take cheese back out until it is 28 grams. Sometimes 27 or 26 grams will be used as 28 if I'm in a hurry. I even weigh my eggs though usually I just use the jumbo setting even though I only use large eggs and they weigh less than the jumbo. I weigh most of my liquids including salad dressing and coffee creamer the same way. I set my bowl, plate, cup, etc on the scale, tare, and then very slowly put my dressing or creamer or ketchup or mayo, whatever, until it says the right weight.

I don't only eat the serving size on everything but I usually do end up doing it in whole numbers. I don't know why. It seems easier, I guess. Haha.

Caitwn wrote: »

"Serving size" doesn't mean much to me these days. I feel like the term has sort of turned into a game by companies to try to make their foods appear lower in calories - hence all of those amusing moments where you read the package and realize that a "serving" is some stupidly small amount of the total.

I just measure out whatever I'm interested in at the moment, weigh it, and make sure it fits into my day.

I was reading the back of some sausages, and the package said there were 6 servings in the package, but only 4 sausages. Who eats 2/3 of a sausage?! The manipulation of a serving is annoying, and supposedly when the new FDA rules go into effect (next year I think?), thing should get slightly better in the US. Slightly. I wonder if cereal servings are going to change; those are always ridiculous.

Always the serving size. Always.