Is the serving size weight (g or oz) always reliable for counting calories?

Options
thewildair
thewildair Posts: 31 Member
in Food and Nutrition
So, I'm well aware that the volume measures given on packaging for nutritional info is frequently slightly off. Usually, though, what I find is that the given weight amounts to less than the given volume. For example, Quaker Rolled Oats lists 1/2 cup or 40g as a serving, but 40g amounts to slightly less than my half-cup measure. So if I was just measuring out a full half-cup, I'd be eating more calories than listed.

However, today I was weighing out cottage cheese (Dean's small curd with chive - 1/2 cup or 113 g for 110 calories) and found that 113g amounts to measurably more than my half-cup measure. So my dilemma is, do I err on the side of caution and only portion out a half-cup by volume, or is the weight the more reliable measure, and I can count on the calories to be fairly close to what's indicated on the nutrition info if I'm going by grams?

Replies

  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,874 Member
    Options
    thewildair wrote: »
    So, I'm well aware that the volume measures given on packaging for nutritional info is frequently slightly off. Usually, though, what I find is that the given weight amounts to less than the given volume. For example, Quaker Rolled Oats lists 1/2 cup or 40g as a serving, but 40g amounts to slightly less than my half-cup measure. So if I was just measuring out a full half-cup, I'd be eating more calories than listed.

    However, today I was weighing out cottage cheese (Dean's small curd with chive - 1/2 cup or 113 g for 110 calories) and found that 113g amounts to measurably more than my half-cup measure. So my dilemma is, do I err on the side of caution and only portion out a half-cup by volume, or is the weight the more reliable measure, and I can count on the calories to be fairly close to what's indicated on the nutrition info if I'm going by grams?

    Weight is the most reliable...that's why people constantly tell people to use a food scale here.
  • capaul42
    capaul42 Posts: 1,390 Member
    Options
    I always go by weight. Definitely makes logging more accurate.
  • malibu927
    malibu927 Posts: 17,565 Member
    Options
    Always, always weight
  • Losewtforlife4him
    Losewtforlife4him Posts: 423 Member
    Options
    As far as oatmeal, I've always measured it in 1/2 cup and so far I've lost 21 lbs so don't think this makes a huge difference where oatmeal is concerned and I eat oatmeal a lot.
  • thewildair
    thewildair Posts: 31 Member
    Options
    Thanks guys, I assumed weight was the more reliable measure, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't miscalculating my calories.
  • chellekoren
    chellekoren Posts: 273 Member
    Options
    I recently got a scale and am shocked at how off I've been with meat measurements. I knew it wasn't exact but it wasn't even close.

Categories