Looking at the complexity of logging Beef.

I was involved in a discussion last week regarding logging meat, raw versus cooked, and being as accurate as possible. It and my own difficulties with trying to be specific got me to thinking more on the subject. Thought I'd share and discuss what I'm finding out. Due to the complexity I'm going to focus on beef, and more specifically beef excluding ground beef.

We all recognize, or should recognize, that outside of a laboratory setting using Calories In/Calories Out is an estimation. We use a mathematical formula approximation to calculate our Calories Out as NEAT, TDEE, BMR, etc. Calorie consumption is based on estimations of food that are average values taken from laboratory testing. When we log the calories in we are basing it of that average estimation. I think that controlling for as many variables as possible is important.

Beef: Is what I am eating matching what I log?

When I log beef I try to use values from the USDA Nutrient Database for Standard Reference(SR) because they are based on averages from lots of meat taken from around the country. I decided to try to use the USDA database as a baseline because data entered into MFP for beef is all over the board.

One of the first problems anyone will run into is trying to determine what cut of meat they are buying and eating. Calories per 100 grams can range from 125 up over 300. The USDA database has numerous product categories and classifications. They identify the part of the cow the beef came from, followed by a host of other information. Am I buying "Choice", "Select", "Prime", or something more generic called "All grades"? What the heck does "Lean Separable Only" and "Lean Separable and Fat" actually mean? Trimmed to 0" Fat versus 1/8" Fat or 1/4"?

Grocery stores labeling most often times takes care of identifying the general cut of meat. Shoulder Roast, Eye of Round, etc. However, there are names that pop up from time to time, such as "London Broil", "Chop Suey", and "Stew Meat". These are not officially recognized cuts, so you have to do a little online research to figure out what is typically used. For instance London Broil is a prepping/cooking method, not a cut. Typically, Top Round or Flank cuts are used when labeled as London Broil. Stew Meat is said to typically be Chuck or Eye of Round. Often times the grade is also on the label, taking out some of the guess work. Choice, and Select are what I have seen prepacked and tend to be less expensive.

What about the difference between "Lean Separable Only" and "Lean Separable and Fat". There are a lot of opinions out there on this subject, most of which have no supporting evidence or facts. The USDA defines them the following way: In the case of “separable lean and fat”, it is assumed that all fat present is consumed. For items described as “separable lean only”, all external trim fat and seam fat are removed from the cut, weighed, and included in the reported
refuse.(1)

From this I would gather that if there are visible strips of fat attached to the meat that are either on the external or found in the seams, and are not going to be trimmed away, we would want to use "Lean Separable and Fat", then look at the selection of trim levels. It might still have a fat trim level of 0" because the visible fat is not covering 1 full side of the cut, and only be in the seam. "Lean Separable Only" does include the lean muscle meat and all intramuscular fat and connective tissue. I believe that is most correctly used only when there is absolutely no visible fat, outside of marbling (intramuscular fat).

My personal choice is to utilize the "Lean Separable and Fat" items because of the inherent tendency to underestimate calorie intake. The research time and again shows a 30% median error rate of underestimating. In some of those studies there was variance for incorrectly identifying what was actually eaten.

What about raw versus cooked?

Which data selection should we use? I found a 2012 report on cooking yields done by the USDA. The SR database includes beef cuts in their cooked states based on a few types of cooking methods. Braised, Broiled, Roasted, Simmered, and Grilled are some of the common cooking descriptors. This was all done to accurately measure the cooked yields and provide a baseline for moisture and fat loss during the cooking. These cooking methods were determined in a laboratory setting with strict cooking guidelines with strict time, temperature, and other protocols we are never going to match in our homes.

For this reason I think using the raw entries and measuring the cooked yield in our homes is more accurate. In general, most of the fat loss is pretty small when cooking beef cuts, excluding ground beef.(2) The loss tends to range from <1% to 5% with a few outliers, such as brisket. However, the moisture loss can be a huge percentage of the over all weight and is going to have a lot of variability depending on the cooking methods used in the home. Additionally, not all cuts of meat have a cooking method listing that accurately reflects what was done.

Here is an example of a couple of items, raw versus cooked.

23059, Beef, chuck, shoulder clod, top blade, steak, separable lean and fat, trimmed to 0" fat, all grades, raw

23060, Beef, chuck, shoulder clod, top blade, steak, separable lean and fat, trimmed to 0" fat, all grades, cooked, grilled

Item 23059 Raw has 176 calories / 100 grams

Item 23060 Grilled has 222 calories / 100 grams

The cooking yield data from 2012 on this product showed a range of 71% to 80% yield from the raw weight.(2) Meaning for every 100 grams of raw product they got 71 to 80 grams cooked. The average yield was 76%.(2) This was under strict cooking guidelines in a laboratory. We cannot match that in the home easily. Just my own anecdotal sampling when I weigh my raw to cooked yields for a range of beef products has been anywhere from 64% to 88%. That has a huge impact on the number of calories consumed.

A simple calculation of Total Raw Weight/ Total Cooked Weight = Multiplier. You then use that multiplier when you weigh your cooked serving of that particular meat. For instance, I cooked a roast the other night. Raw weight of the whole roast was 1466 grams. Cooked weight of the whole roast was 1166. 1466/1166 = 1.26 (rounded up).

A slice of that roast weighing 100 grams is equal to 126 grams of the raw. I will log 126 grams of the raw product.

1.ARS/USDA Composition of Foods Raw, Processed, Prepared USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 26 Documentation and User Guide

2. ARS/USDA Cooking Yields Data