Serving Sizes for Fruit and Vegetables

2

Replies

  • ChristieisReady
    ChristieisReady Posts: 708 Member
    edited January 2016
    yarwell wrote: »
    The WHO's serving size for "five a day" policies is 80 grams isn't it ? That would make some apples almost two servings.
    Hence the caveat of "medium apple". Which is about 2 3/4" in diameter. Seriously, you guys. You are telling me that you believe that a person who cannot differentiate between a "small" and "medium" apple CAN look at it and go "well, that's about 80 grams"? Who are these savants and where do you find them?


    I'm a fairly well-educated woman, but as an American, I have no real frame of reference for "grams". Ounces, yes. Grams, no.
  • CooCooPuff
    CooCooPuff Posts: 4,374 Member
    I'm a fairly well-educated woman, but as an American, I have no real frame of reference for "grams". Ounces, yes. Grams, no.
    screen.png

  • ChristieisReady
    ChristieisReady Posts: 708 Member
    edited January 2016
    Thank you @CooCooPuff , I too can use google. But This is meant to be a QUICK REFERENCE chart. Like, I'm at work, there is free salad, about how much of my base requirement does that cover.

    80 grams is 1/6 of a pound? The **** kind of tiny apples are 6 to a lb?

    As a group, you are aggravating and ridiculous. I maintain that this is why your friends do not like you.

  • Acidique
    Acidique Posts: 119 Member
    All I know is, when I weigh my apples, I've had them vary in calories from 85 - 150. That adds up when you have an apple daily. *shrug*
  • ChristieisReady
    ChristieisReady Posts: 708 Member
    edited January 2016
    You honestly can't look at an apple and say "that looks quite a bit larger than yesterday's apple, it must have proportionately more calories. I should probably consider it as a 'large' apple, which is about a serving and a half"?

    ALSO, on precise measurements, do you weigh the core when you're done to see how much you didn't eat? Do you account for the caloric difference in core and seeds vs. flesh? Just how much time are you devoting to this exact study of how many kCals are entering your body?
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    You honestly can't look at an apple and say "that looks quite a bit larger than yesterday's apple, it must have proportionately more calories. I should probably consider it as a 'large' apple, which is about a serving and a half"?

    I think this assumes that some of us have the ability to compare the size of a piece of fruit to the size of yesterday's fruit, which isn't a skill that we all have. Apples or bananas will look the same to me, but when I weigh them I can have significant variances.

    If you have the ability to distinguish between a medium and large apple, that's awesome. But studies have shown that many people are terrible at estimating portion size and the scale can be a very useful tool for them.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    Thank you @CooCooPuff , I too can use google. But This is meant to be a QUICK REFERENCE chart. Like, I'm at work, there is free salad, about how much of my base requirement does that cover.

    80 grams is 1/6 of a pound? The **** kind of tiny apples are 6 to a lb?

    As a group, you are aggravating and ridiculous. I maintain that this is why your friends do not like you.

    And that is extremely rude and I can't imagine that you have any friend if you're saying those things as soon as someone disagrees with you. Wow. Do you personally know everyone in this thread? I'm seriously shaking my head here.
    Acidique wrote: »
    All I know is, when I weigh my apples, I've had them vary in calories from 85 - 150. That adds up when you have an apple daily. *shrug*

    You know, I've weighed all my apples for a long time (edible part, obviously), and I've yet to see any apple that is 150 calories, so I'm a little bit confused. Most of my bigger apples come out at 90 calories once I remove the core (although I guess that I remove a bit more than the core). That's using a USDA entry for the type of apple that I eat too.

    Seriously confused about apples now.

    That being said, volume entries are sorta useful when you go out to eat and have to guesstimate, but at the same time, once you weigh your food long enough, you pretty much know what 80g of broccoli looks like.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    You honestly can't look at an apple and say "that looks quite a bit larger than yesterday's apple, it must have proportionately more calories. I should probably consider it as a 'large' apple, which is about a serving and a half"?

    ALSO, on precise measurements, do you weigh the core when you're done to see how much you didn't eat? Do you account for the caloric difference in core and seeds vs. flesh? Just how much time are you devoting to this exact study of how many kCals are entering your body?

    I can't speak for everyone, but I do weigh the parts of the fruit I don't eat (peels, cores, etc). It takes a couple of seconds to weigh something, probably about as much time as it would take to look at an apple and compare it to the size of the apple that I ate yesterday.
  • faidwen
    faidwen Posts: 131 Member
    Excellent, thank you very much!
  • OhMsDiva
    OhMsDiva Posts: 1,073 Member
    I am just curious. I am supposed to eat 2 cups of veggies a day. I usually go over so I dont bother to measure, but if I can just weigh it on a scale it would be much easier. What would the equivalent of 2 cups be on a scale?
  • juggernaut1974
    juggernaut1974 Posts: 6,212 Member
    OhMsDiva wrote: »
    I am just curious. I am supposed to eat 2 cups of veggies a day. I usually go over so I dont bother to measure, but if I can just weigh it on a scale it would be much easier. What would the equivalent of 2 cups be on a scale?

    Can't answer...that's like asking how many seconds are in a mile.


  • OhMsDiva
    OhMsDiva Posts: 1,073 Member
    OhMsDiva wrote: »
    I am just curious. I am supposed to eat 2 cups of veggies a day. I usually go over so I dont bother to measure, but if I can just weigh it on a scale it would be much easier. What would the equivalent of 2 cups be on a scale?

    Can't answer...that's like asking how many seconds are in a mile.


    That's why I ask questions on here. Its so much fun reading all the wiseacre answers that people are just waiting to reply with. Just like when I am in a boring meeting and I ask a meaningless question to amuse myself. Thanks
  • juggernaut1974
    juggernaut1974 Posts: 6,212 Member
    OhMsDiva wrote: »
    OhMsDiva wrote: »
    I am just curious. I am supposed to eat 2 cups of veggies a day. I usually go over so I dont bother to measure, but if I can just weigh it on a scale it would be much easier. What would the equivalent of 2 cups be on a scale?

    Can't answer...that's like asking how many seconds are in a mile.


    That's why I ask questions on here. Its so much fun reading all the wiseacre answers that people are just waiting to reply with. Just like when I am in a boring meeting and I ask a meaningless question to amuse myself. Thanks

    It wasn't meant to be a wiseacre answer...you asked an impossible question to answer.

    2 cups of lettuce vs. 2 cups of carrots vs. 2 cups of broccoli would all weigh substantially different.

    Heck - even for the same vegetable 2 cups of carrot sticks vs. 2 cups of diced carrots vs. 2 cups of shredded carrots would all have vastly different weights.
  • daltonjsmom
    daltonjsmom Posts: 74 Member
    I tend to beat myself up about a lot of things. When I can do a happy dance because I got in 7, 9, or even 11 servings of fruit/veg a day, I am going to take the credit for that. I appreciate Christie taking the time to share the chart she made. Got a kick out of seeing a sweet pickle listed as a vegetable. Doubt I'll be adding one to a smoothie anytime soon, but I thought this was a handy reference sheet. Positive support and simple real life applications are what we can all use on this site!
  • ChristieisReady
    ChristieisReady Posts: 708 Member
    @Francl27 ... It's a scientifically proven fact that nitpicky people who can't just leave something they see alone if they don't like it are universally disliked by their friends. I checked the statistics. Now, I'm not going to go thru the 2016 roster of everyone who qualifies to see if your name is included in the international database but...
  • RoxieDawn
    RoxieDawn Posts: 15,488 Member
    edited January 2016
    You know for the small and short people out there like myself there is no wiggle room to measure in cups like this.

    For example I eat small granny smith apple (cored) every day and it barely fills up a cup and the grams are any where from 85 - 120. There is a huge difference and the apples all look the same size to me.

    If you are going to use the hand, palm and fist measurements then you would not be here logging every gram.. Cups used to be the way I did it, and I can tell you it hampered my calories in and calories out thanks to being one of those that can't wing it.

    The chart is cool and probably will work for some than can be loose on their calories.
  • OhMsDiva
    OhMsDiva Posts: 1,073 Member
    OhMsDiva wrote: »
    OhMsDiva wrote: »
    I am just curious. I am supposed to eat 2 cups of veggies a day. I usually go over so I dont bother to measure, but if I can just weigh it on a scale it would be much easier. What would the equivalent of 2 cups be on a scale?

    Can't answer...that's like asking how many seconds are in a mile.


    That's why I ask questions on here. Its so much fun reading all the wiseacre answers that people are just waiting to reply with. Just like when I am in a boring meeting and I ask a meaningless question to amuse myself. Thanks

    It wasn't meant to be a wiseacre answer...you asked an impossible question to answer.

    2 cups of lettuce vs. 2 cups of carrots vs. 2 cups of broccoli would all weigh substantially different.

    Heck - even for the same vegetable 2 cups of carrot sticks vs. 2 cups of diced carrots vs. 2 cups of shredded carrots would all have vastly different weights.

    My bad...
  • ChristieisReady
    ChristieisReady Posts: 708 Member
    gia07 wrote: »
    You know for the small and short people out there like myself there is no wiggle room to measure in cups like this.
    The chart is cool and probably will work for some than can be loose on their calories.
    That's kind of what it was for... never, EVER intended it to replace MFP, weighing, measuring, etc. It's just my personal findings in answer to my personal question of "when you say 'eat 5 servings of vegetables', what is that meant to mean?".

    For those of you who eat more than this, cool. I mean, no one only eats one serving of food at a meal. You eat a serving or three of veggies, and 1 or 2 of meat and 2 of grains, (or not- do not tell me about your personal diet- I don't care), and that's a meal. A "helping", as it were, which is not the same as a "serving".

    Honestly? If you weigh your food, this wasn't for you. Move on. Go talk on the message boards about the best food scales or whether or not the pith of an orange is included in the calorie count and how to account for not eating it. Or go talk about interesting things. Go. Live. Stop obsessing over a chart of loose guidelines designed to loosely guide those of us who are not bound within a 20-calorie bracket.
  • ChristieisReady
    ChristieisReady Posts: 708 Member
    edited January 2016
    OhMsDiva wrote: »
    I am just curious. I am supposed to eat 2 cups of veggies a day. I usually go over so I dont bother to measure, but if I can just weigh it on a scale it would be much easier. What would the equivalent of 2 cups be on a scale?

    Hey @OhMsDiva , out of curiosity, who told you you were supposed to eat "2 cups of veggies per day"? As you've noted, that's not really a helpful or meaningful prescription.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,011 Member
    gia07 wrote: »
    You know for the small and short people out there like myself there is no wiggle room to measure in cups like this.
    The chart is cool and probably will work for some than can be loose on their calories.
    That's kind of what it was for... never, EVER intended it to replace MFP, weighing, measuring, etc. It's just my personal findings in answer to my personal question of "when you say 'eat 5 servings of vegetables', what is that meant to mean?".

    For those of you who eat more than this, cool. I mean, no one only eats one serving of food at a meal. You eat a serving or three of veggies, and 1 or 2 of meat and 2 of grains, (or not- do not tell me about your personal diet- I don't care), and that's a meal. A "helping", as it were, which is not the same as a "serving".

    Honestly? If you weigh your food, this wasn't for you. Move on. Go talk on the message boards about the best food scales or whether or not the pith of an orange is included in the calorie count and how to account for not eating it. Or go talk about interesting things. Go. Live. Stop obsessing over a chart of loose guidelines designed to loosely guide those of us who are not bound within a 20-calorie bracket.

    I understand you are upset that folks are criticizing your chart when you just intended it as a quick helpful reference, but there's no need for the condescending tone you are using towards people who are serious about counting their calories. Especially since this is a forum on a calorie-counting website.

    I won't judge your chart; you don't judge the way I managed to really easily successfully lose my extra weight. And not only do I still have friends, but hardly anyone I know even realizes I was trying to lose weight. Best of luck to you on realizing your goals, no matter how you choose to reach them.
  • ChristieisReady
    ChristieisReady Posts: 708 Member
    edited January 2016
    kimny72 wrote: »
    there's no need for the condescending tone you are using towards people who are serious about counting their calories.

    I'm just perplexed as to why anyone would go to the effort of commenting (some people multiple times) on something that doesn't apply to them. If you're weighing food and counting calories very carefully, you don't need this. That's like me going onto a thread that talks about diabetic guidelines and saying "I just eat sugar how I want to. I'm not diabetic. You should just do what I do."- that would asinine.

    If you have time to weigh your food- awesome! If you don't, you might want a rule of thumb. That's what this was meant to be. Not a salvo against precision dieting (tho that doesn't go well for me- that's not what this is about).

    Basically, I'm flummoxed as to why someone would comment "this doesn't apply to me" or "this isn't what I do" because...... why do they think anyone cares? Move. On. To the next post. Super simple stuff.
  • ChristieisReady
    ChristieisReady Posts: 708 Member
    Since I'm always wondering what a "serving size" of a vegetable actually is, I went and looked it up. And made a chart. And am sharing it here. Obviously, a serving size of apple is 1 apple, but what about apricots (it's 3). If you're ever in doubt, it looks like "1 cup" is a good rule of thumb, but here's the exact servings and their calorie contents. (Ok, not EXACT. Just, you know, more accurate.)



    **note: this is for RAW produce unless otherwise noted, in which case it's STEAMED. Roasting, sauteeing, etc. add their own nutritional spin, so this is just the plants.8388jeabklei.jpg


    In case you were here for content, and not just for random bickering. Here's the chart. Hope you like it.

    (Not too interested in hearing about it if you don't.) :*
  • ChristieisReady
    ChristieisReady Posts: 708 Member
    I'm a fairly well-educated woman, but as an American, I have no real frame of reference for "grams". Ounces, yes. Grams, no.

    1 gram = about 2 paper clips

    Now you're just messing with me. I am not about to mentally convert apples to paperclips and divide by 2 to get grams. Nope.
  • Acidique
    Acidique Posts: 119 Member
    You honestly can't look at an apple and say "that looks quite a bit larger than yesterday's apple, it must have proportionately more calories. I should probably consider it as a 'large' apple, which is about a serving and a half"?

    ALSO, on precise measurements, do you weigh the core when you're done to see how much you didn't eat? Do you account for the caloric difference in core and seeds vs. flesh? Just how much time are you devoting to this exact study of how many kCals are entering your body?

    I slice up the apple and throw the core away. Then I weigh it. Then I eat it.
  • Acidique
    Acidique Posts: 119 Member
    edited January 2016
    Acidique wrote: »
    All I know is, when I weigh my apples, I've had them vary in calories from 85 - 150. That adds up when you have an apple daily. *shrug*
    You know, I've weighed all my apples for a long time (edible part, obviously), and I've yet to see any apple that is 150 calories, so I'm a little bit confused. Most of my bigger apples come out at 90 calories once I remove the core (although I guess that I remove a bit more than the core). That's using a USDA entry for the type of apple that I eat too.

    Seriously confused about apples now.

    That being said, volume entries are sorta useful when you go out to eat and have to guesstimate, but at the same time, once you weigh your food long enough, you pretty much know what 80g of broccoli looks like.

    To be honest, the ones that were around 125-150 were HUGE. I got them at Costco. I don't normally see apples that big. The ones I have now are around 85 calories.
  • veganbettie
    veganbettie Posts: 701 Member
    wooooow...

    I am just floored.
  • ChristieisReady
    ChristieisReady Posts: 708 Member
    Acidique wrote: »
    To be honest, the ones that were around 125-150 were HUGE. I got them at Costco. I don't normally see apples that big. The ones I have now are around 85 calories.

    So.... those would NOT be "medium" apples then. And you can, in fact, see the difference. So, if you chose to, you might be able to judge between "small", "med", "large" and "damn, that's like 2 apples" apples.

  • Downwinds
    Downwinds Posts: 15 Member
    I never understand what size a 'cup' is supposed to be. I weigh everything in grams, it's easier and more accurate.. Unless it's like a few lettuce leaves. Then it's so calorie-low that I just don't bother. But vague measurements just make me anxious as I'm never sure what they mean and how far out I am and how big a difference that makes in calories. I have to be accurate and weigh everything because it's the only way I can feel comfortable that I'm being accurate.
  • ChristieisReady
    ChristieisReady Posts: 708 Member
    Oook. This is a chart for people who DO NOT WEIGH THEIR FOOD. If you have a scale, go do that. That's wonderful. Yay, you! If you are not interested in a strict diet, but are instead looking for a lifetime change involving judging portions and recommended servings, this might be helpful.

    A cup is an 8-oz cup. Maybe it's a metric issue? Perhaps this is a chart for Americans. I'm not sure now. Enjoy the chart, don't enjoy the chart, whatever.

    Just.... stick an apple in it.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,011 Member
    OP, just for future reference, when you post something on a public forum, anyone can comment on it, for any reason. And they will. Sometimes because they want to add more info for newbie lurkers who are still finding their way, sometimes because they have an agenda they are quick to inject, sometimes because they misunderstood your point. And sometimes random internet people are just jerks. It happens in every public forum, that's kind of how internet forums work, for better or worse. Your best bet is to ignore the replies that you don't think apply, have a conversation with the ones that do, and see if there is anything you can learn from the criticisms. If you ever do make a post that everyone agrees with, you should print it out and have it laminated and framed for posterity. But letting every reply that doesn't 100% agree with your OP get under your skin is a recipe for disaster, and a waste of time and energy.