So I told my mom I'd like a food scale for Christmas and she says "I have one you can use!" ...

Mary_Anastasia
Mary_Anastasia Posts: 267 Member
edited November 13 in Food and Nutrition
gamzfaeqkpnr.jpg

Hahahahaha! I actually used it this morning, too! Better than nothing, eh? LOL
«1

Replies

  • crzycatlady1
    crzycatlady1 Posts: 1,930 Member
    Hahaha, that's awesome :#
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    OK .. I don't get it .. Whenever a discussion of scales comes up in the forums, it seems that someone is very concerned about the scale measuring in grams. I see comments like freedom's above, and urgings to make sure it measures in grams!! Why?
  • quiksylver296
    quiksylver296 Posts: 28,439 Member
    Wow!!! That's awesome. :p
  • GottaBurnEmAll
    GottaBurnEmAll Posts: 7,722 Member
    That is really cool.
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    edited December 2016
    Awesome scale!!
    sullus wrote: »
    OK .. I don't get it .. Whenever a discussion of scales comes up in the forums, it seems that someone is very concerned about the scale measuring in grams. I see comments like freedom's above, and urgings to make sure it measures in grams!! Why?

    Because grams are more accurate, especially for calorie dense items.

    More accurate than what? My scale goes to 2 decimal places with ounces (yeah it does grams too) .. but 3.27 ounces is no less accurate than 92.4 grams. (in fact its a touch more accurate)

    The key to accuracy is digital and not analog. With an analog scale, you have to interpolate.

    ETA: Awesome scale by the way. Classic Weight Watchers stuff. I think my mom has one of these kicking around too.
  • Cedura
    Cedura Posts: 184 Member

    My mom goes "you shouldn't be eating more than 1lb of something anyway!"

    Good point, mom LOL

    Hahaha, that sounds like something my mom would say. I guess even the whole pound of lettuce or carrots would be a lot.

    (Although I am totally guilty of binge eating a whole 1lb bag of baby carrots in the course of a day.)
  • liftorgohome
    liftorgohome Posts: 25,455 Member
    electrnic food scales are fairly cheap on amazon. You should get one of those.
  • AngryViking1970
    AngryViking1970 Posts: 2,847 Member
    HA! I think my mom had one of those, too!
  • T1DCarnivoreRunner
    T1DCarnivoreRunner Posts: 11,502 Member
    That is so old it's cool again, a hipster scale! Does it do grams?

    Yes it does grams!! HOWEVER it only has a 1lb capacity :open_mouth:

    My mom goes "you shouldn't be eating more than 1lb of something anyway!"

    Good point, mom LOL

    My smaller plates, by themselves, weigh almost 1 lb. Since this obviously doesn't have an automatic tare function, plate / container weight could be relevant to the 1 lb. limit.

    Also, I common have more than 1 lb. on my scale.. sometimes more than 2 lbs. Once, when making a batch (used the recipe feature on MFP), I weighed the entire batch with the scale I use to weigh myself because it exceeded the weight limit for my digital food scale. When I make recipes, I put in the number of servings as the total ounces or grams so I can log the portions based on weight as well. This particular batch (chili) was more than 18 lbs.

    So while it is better than nothing, don't pretend you aren't missing out on a few things.
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    sullus wrote: »
    OK .. I don't get it .. Whenever a discussion of scales comes up in the forums, it seems that someone is very concerned about the scale measuring in grams. I see comments like freedom's above, and urgings to make sure it measures in grams!! Why?

    There's no reason for it other than people being overly picky. My scale measures ounces to the nearest .05, which is equivalent to 1.4 grams. Even if we're talking peanut butter that is 8.5 calories difference. Not enough to sweat over.
  • cosmonew
    cosmonew Posts: 513 Member
    I would pass on that. Thanks but no thanks, digital is going to be so much easier. I second the look on Amazon. I have 3 scales, just in case one, or two break. I am sure they were all under $20
  • yayamom3
    yayamom3 Posts: 939 Member
    At some point, you'll probably want a scale that goes higher than one pound. I weigh entire pots of soup to determine how many grams one serving will be. A friend gave me my first digital scale for Christmas. It was one of the best gifts I've ever received.
  • Mary_Anastasia
    Mary_Anastasia Posts: 267 Member
    That is so old it's cool again, a hipster scale! Does it do grams?

    Yes it does grams!! HOWEVER it only has a 1lb capacity :open_mouth:

    My mom goes "you shouldn't be eating more than 1lb of something anyway!"

    Good point, mom LOL

    My smaller plates, by themselves, weigh almost 1 lb. Since this obviously doesn't have an automatic tare function, plate / container weight could be relevant to the 1 lb. limit.

    Also, I common have more than 1 lb. on my scale.. sometimes more than 2 lbs. Once, when making a batch (used the recipe feature on MFP), I weighed the entire batch with the scale I use to weigh myself because it exceeded the weight limit for my digital food scale. When I make recipes, I put in the number of servings as the total ounces or grams so I can log the portions based on weight as well. This particular batch (chili) was more than 18 lbs.

    So while it is better than nothing, don't pretend you aren't missing out on a few things.

    Oh, I know, I still want a proper scale! I did a lot of research on the one I want- I do a ton of cooking that comes up to well over 5lbs for a recipe. The plate thing: well I weighed my breakfast on it on a piece of cling wrap haha She scoffed when I asked if it could tare the weight of a ziplock bag.
  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    That is so old it's cool again, a hipster scale! Does it do grams?

    Yes it does grams!! HOWEVER it only has a 1lb capacity :open_mouth:

    My mom goes "you shouldn't be eating more than 1lb of something anyway!"

    Good point, mom LOL

    My smaller plates, by themselves, weigh almost 1 lb. Since this obviously doesn't have an automatic tare function, plate / container weight could be relevant to the 1 lb. limit.

    Also, I common have more than 1 lb. on my scale.. sometimes more than 2 lbs. Once, when making a batch (used the recipe feature on MFP), I weighed the entire batch with the scale I use to weigh myself because it exceeded the weight limit for my digital food scale. When I make recipes, I put in the number of servings as the total ounces or grams so I can log the portions based on weight as well. This particular batch (chili) was more than 18 lbs.

    So while it is better than nothing, don't pretend you aren't missing out on a few things.

    Oh, I know, I still want a proper scale! I did a lot of research on the one I want- I do a ton of cooking that comes up to well over 5lbs for a recipe. The plate thing: well I weighed my breakfast on it on a piece of cling wrap haha She scoffed when I asked if it could tare the weight of a ziplock bag.

    Yes - you do want a newer one.

    I have one of these old school scales too. The tare function on newer scales is incredibly useful.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    sullus wrote: »
    OK .. I don't get it .. Whenever a discussion of scales comes up in the forums, it seems that someone is very concerned about the scale measuring in grams. I see comments like freedom's above, and urgings to make sure it measures in grams!! Why?

    Personally, measuring in grams is way easier. I use all the USDA 100 g entries for things, and if I measure in grams I can just log .42 (for 42 g) or whatever. Way more convenient than messing with oz.
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    OK .. I don't get it .. Whenever a discussion of scales comes up in the forums, it seems that someone is very concerned about the scale measuring in grams. I see comments like freedom's above, and urgings to make sure it measures in grams!! Why?

    Personally, measuring in grams is way easier. I use all the USDA 100 g entries for things, and if I measure in grams I can just log .42 (for 42 g) or whatever. Way more convenient than messing with oz.

    I get why it is convenient .. I just never understood all the hullabaloo about it being required. Math is easy.
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    sullus wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    OK .. I don't get it .. Whenever a discussion of scales comes up in the forums, it seems that someone is very concerned about the scale measuring in grams. I see comments like freedom's above, and urgings to make sure it measures in grams!! Why?

    Personally, measuring in grams is way easier. I use all the USDA 100 g entries for things, and if I measure in grams I can just log .42 (for 42 g) or whatever. Way more convenient than messing with oz.

    I get why it is convenient .. I just never understood all the hullabaloo about it being required. Math is easy.

    Lol. :grin:

    To be fair, not everybody agrees that math is easy (or fun or intuitive...) I do but I think we're in the minority.
  • PikaJoyJoy
    PikaJoyJoy Posts: 280 Member
    jemhh wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    OK .. I don't get it .. Whenever a discussion of scales comes up in the forums, it seems that someone is very concerned about the scale measuring in grams. I see comments like freedom's above, and urgings to make sure it measures in grams!! Why?

    There's no reason for it other than people being overly picky. My scale measures ounces to the nearest .05, which is equivalent to 1.4 grams. Even if we're talking peanut butter that is 8.5 calories difference. Not enough to sweat over.

    I don't mind using ounces. I do agree that it isn't so much of a huge difference that it'll break you . But I don't know about anyone else but a lot of things I tend to eat are weighed out more in grams over ounces. So for me, it's just easier to have a scale that does both, especially because I suck at math. :D
  • PikaJoyJoy
    PikaJoyJoy Posts: 280 Member
    edited December 2016
    jemhh wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    OK .. I don't get it .. Whenever a discussion of scales comes up in the forums, it seems that someone is very concerned about the scale measuring in grams. I see comments like freedom's above, and urgings to make sure it measures in grams!! Why?

    There's no reason for it other than people being overly picky. My scale measures ounces to the nearest .05, which is equivalent to 1.4 grams. Even if we're talking peanut butter that is 8.5 calories difference. Not enough to sweat over.

    I don't mind using ounces. I do agree that it isn't so much of a huge difference that it'll break you . But I don't know about anyone else but a lot of things I tend to eat are weighed out more in grams over ounces. So for me, it's just easier to have a scale that does both, especially because I suck at math. :D

    There are conversion apps, of course, but I'm "lazy." :lol:
  • zyxst
    zyxst Posts: 9,149 Member
    As soon as I saw the title, I knew what scale it would be. My only problem with those scales is recalibrating them.
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    sullus wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    OK .. I don't get it .. Whenever a discussion of scales comes up in the forums, it seems that someone is very concerned about the scale measuring in grams. I see comments like freedom's above, and urgings to make sure it measures in grams!! Why?

    Personally, measuring in grams is way easier. I use all the USDA 100 g entries for things, and if I measure in grams I can just log .42 (for 42 g) or whatever. Way more convenient than messing with oz.

    I get why it is convenient .. I just never understood all the hullabaloo about it being required. Math is easy.

    Oh it's not required if your scale does two decimal ounce digits, or even one if you don't consume a lot of calorie dense food. Personally, I weight in grams because that's what I'm used to using. Ounces and pounds feel like arbitrary units of measurement to me.
  • Karb_Kween
    Karb_Kween Posts: 2,681 Member
    Thats funny
  • KellyAnnMeegan
    KellyAnnMeegan Posts: 5 Member
    That's awesome my Mom had the same scale years ago
  • jennifer_417
    jennifer_417 Posts: 12,344 Member
    sullus wrote: »
    OK .. I don't get it .. Whenever a discussion of scales comes up in the forums, it seems that someone is very concerned about the scale measuring in grams. I see comments like freedom's above, and urgings to make sure it measures in grams!! Why?

    Smaller unit=More accuracy
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    sullus wrote: »
    OK .. I don't get it .. Whenever a discussion of scales comes up in the forums, it seems that someone is very concerned about the scale measuring in grams. I see comments like freedom's above, and urgings to make sure it measures in grams!! Why?

    Smaller unit=More accuracy

    No. Theoretically better precision, but not more accuracy.
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    edited December 2016
    TR0berts wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    OK .. I don't get it .. Whenever a discussion of scales comes up in the forums, it seems that someone is very concerned about the scale measuring in grams. I see comments like freedom's above, and urgings to make sure it measures in grams!! Why?

    Smaller unit=More accuracy

    No. Theoretically better precision, but not more accuracy.

    tuKaGyM.jpg
This discussion has been closed.