Sad Servings...

Options
12346

Replies

  • scyian
    scyian Posts: 243 Member
    Options
    Mayonnaise was pretty depressing. 10g square of Lindt 90% chocolate was surprisingly high but I'm not giving that up. That's my evening treat.
  • Lounmoun
    Lounmoun Posts: 8,426 Member
    Options
    Soopatt wrote: »
    It sounds like a lot of people look at the recommended serving sizes and adhere to that. I never do that. I eat the amount of the thing I want and fit it into my calories, the only nutritional info that has value is the "calories per 100g" section, as with that information I can work out any amount. I have seldom seen a serving size I agree with.

    Sometimes I want a little, sometimes I want a lot. I will decide - not some food manufacturer trying to force feed me or deceive me into thinking his product is not calorie dense.

    I think the point here is that some foods have a large amount of calories for a small amount and it surprises people or makes them feel sad/frustrated, etc. not that they are surprised by a recommended serving size or deceptive packaging. That is another issue.
    I also do not eat the serving size listed on a package. I decide what amount fits my calorie goal that day and eat it.
    I was surprised/shocked/dismayed by the high calorie count of some foods when I started really logging everything. It was an eye opener on foods I used to eat in larger quantities. I've altered how often I eat those foods or the amount I eat.
  • Yoshirio
    Yoshirio Posts: 242 Member
    Options
    Ice cream. It broke my heart.:(
  • MarcyKirkton
    MarcyKirkton Posts: 507 Member
    Options
    Soopatt wrote: »
    It sounds like a lot of people look at the recommended serving sizes and adhere to that. I never do that. I eat the amount of the thing I want and fit it into my calories, the only nutritional info that has value is the "calories per 100g" section, as with that information I can work out any amount. I have seldom seen a serving size I agree with.

    Sometimes I want a little, sometimes I want a lot. I will decide - not some food manufacturer trying to force feed me or deceive me into thinking his product is not calorie dense.
    No. It's just misleading, mostly.
  • Abby2205
    Abby2205 Posts: 253 Member
    Options
    MarcyKirkton wrote: »
    I think the entire food industry is in for a shock in the near future as someone is going to address the entire servings deal. It is absurd on way too many products.

    In Canada, Health Canada has proposed standardizing the serving size on some products to "what Canadians usually eat" or to more easily compare between brands. For example, the serving size of bread on the nutrition facts would be standardized to 2 slices, and the serving size for crackers would be standardized to 20 g (or the number of pieces that is closest to 20 g).
  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    Options
    I don't understand why the calories are not labeled as simply per 100g without the use of serving sizes at all. It's up to the individual IMO to determine their total calorie intake and take charge of the size of serving of food they choose to eat.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    Options
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    I don't understand why the calories are not labeled as simply per 100g without the use of serving sizes at all. It's up to the individual IMO to determine their total calorie intake and take charge of the size of serving of food they choose to eat.

    But then people would have no clue how much 100g is (as 99% of people don't use a scale), so I sorta see the point.
  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    Options
    Francl27 wrote: »
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    I don't understand why the calories are not labeled as simply per 100g without the use of serving sizes at all. It's up to the individual IMO to determine their total calorie intake and take charge of the size of serving of food they choose to eat.

    But then people would have no clue how much 100g is (as 99% of people don't use a scale), so I sorta see the point.

    i just cant see how that is more accurate though when saying something like "about 13 chips" or "around 2.15 cookies".
  • Queenmunchy
    Queenmunchy Posts: 3,380 Member
    Options
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    Francl27 wrote: »
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    I don't understand why the calories are not labeled as simply per 100g without the use of serving sizes at all. It's up to the individual IMO to determine their total calorie intake and take charge of the size of serving of food they choose to eat.

    But then people would have no clue how much 100g is (as 99% of people don't use a scale), so I sorta see the point.

    i just cant see how that is more accurate though when saying something like "about 13 chips" or "around 2.15 cookies".

    It's not more accurate, but if you do want accuracy, you have that too - the grams are always listed after the approximation. The first is just more accessible.
  • MorganMoreaux
    MorganMoreaux Posts: 691 Member
    Options
    MarcyKirkton wrote: »
    I think the entire food industry is in for a shock in the near future as someone is going to address the entire servings deal. It is absurd on way too many products.

    Possibly. It needs to be addressed sooner rather than later. I often Read the nutrition info on food items while waiting in line. The Doritos Dinamita was appalling. 140 cal per serving, and then in fine print bag has 4.5 servings. This was at a gas station, and the bag was small - insinuating for one person. If someone were to eat the entire bag it would be 630 calories. I can't help but to feel that is almost a form of false advertising as most people would presume that small bag to be one serving - like the regular Doritos bags are. It really made me angry to see that.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    Options
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    Francl27 wrote: »
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    I don't understand why the calories are not labeled as simply per 100g without the use of serving sizes at all. It's up to the individual IMO to determine their total calorie intake and take charge of the size of serving of food they choose to eat.

    But then people would have no clue how much 100g is (as 99% of people don't use a scale), so I sorta see the point.

    i just cant see how that is more accurate though when saying something like "about 13 chips" or "around 2.15 cookies".

    Someone who eats 2 cookies will still be closer to the 37g serving than someone who eats 3 cookies thinking that it's 30g.
  • VeryKatie
    VeryKatie Posts: 5,949 Member
    Options
    Pasta also. Especially with alfredo sauce... And... yep honestly mini Reese. I had a bag at a movie once and checked calories later. BAM 900 calories gone and I was like wtf.
  • Devol82
    Devol82 Posts: 80 Member
    Options
    I recently started weighing my food... So far, everything surprises me also : ( uh yeah, no wonder I was not losing weight.
  • brower47
    brower47 Posts: 16,356 Member
    edited November 2015
    Options
    knelson095 wrote: »
    So, I just weighed out a serving of Reese's Pieces...and checked the numbers three times because the serving is SO SMALL. :'(

    Like, so small you guys. 200 calories and it's basically a handful.

    What's the most surprising/sad portion size you have discovered while trying to lose weight?



    Also, I ate that portion anyway...I regret nothing.

    They are delicious. I like to nuke them in the microwave for 5-10 seconds. Good luck with your logging and moderation goals! I hope they work for you!
  • mkakids
    mkakids Posts: 1,913 Member
    Options
    ceckhardt369 wrote: »
    The one that is getting me right now is soup. Who the heck eats half a can of soup at a time?? Considering figuring out how to make my own soup, not what what I buy is super high in calories but it irritates me to have to put that I ate two servings of it just to feel like I ate something!

    soup is one of the easiest things in the world to make! give it a shot!
  • samgamgee
    samgamgee Posts: 398 Member
    Options
    Pasta. I used to cook up a big bowl of it regularly for dinner at university and man, there must have been about 1000 calories in that bowl...

    Tortilla chips. Seriously difficult to keep track of when friends are round for film night!
  • mattyc772014
    mattyc772014 Posts: 3,543 Member
    Options
    Whipped cream from a can, Candy Corn and chocolate chips. How many times can you go to the frig and spray some whipped cream in your mouth? Then you hear that voice from the other room..."What ya doin? Nuttin!" I need a silencer for my can. lol
  • bmayes2014
    bmayes2014 Posts: 232 Member
    edited November 2015
    Options
    ice cream! hands down. wth!!

    Followed by syrup. Syrup is out of control - the calories per serving. smh
  • scyian
    scyian Posts: 243 Member
    Options
    While we're on the discussion of annoying labelling. I got a Bounty Bar and I forget the calories stated on the wrapper but when you look in more detail it's for just one piece rather than the whole bar.
  • superhockeymom
    superhockeymom Posts: 2,000 Member
    Options
    mattyc772014 wrote: »
    Whipped cream from a can, Candy Corn and chocolate chips. How many times can you go to the frig and spray some whipped cream in your mouth? Then you hear that voice from the other room..."What ya doin? Nuttin!" I need a silencer for my can. lol

    I do that and the dog comes running because she wants some too. And that's why me and my big girl are fitness buddy's pushing for 6O miles next week.

Categories