Measure EVERYTHING. Pam spray: 3 grams = 26 calories
Replies
-
I see no reason not to log everything to the best of my ability and to eat the maximum calories that are compatible with my goals!
If it raises your cortisol levels... go ahead and don't log it.
My cortisol if much happier knowing that I've logged my 9 Cal of cinnamon and 18 Cal of Pam and 4 Cal of pepper and 18 Cal of coffee.
And that no calorie will remain unaccounted for or for that matter un-eaten without good reason!
My cortisol is more easily triggered by the scale not moving for unknown reasons. I'd rather control all the variables I can. Logging as accurately as possible isn't stressful for me.6 -
Michelle2622017 wrote: »I log all calories.
When I use the "0 calorie" cooking spray, I count one mississippi, two mississippi, and use 20 calories per second.
The package says 0 cals per serving and that a serving is 1/4 of a second. Since up to 5 cals can be rounded to 0 cals, I am assuming that one serving is 4.999 or something equally annoying. 5 × 4 = 20.
So, that is why I use 20 cals per second.
Put a cold frying pan on the scale. Repeat your experiment. I've come up with approximately 1 gram per second which would make it about 9 calories for one of my seconds. Of course each person's subjective seconds could wvary
Our seconds are the same.1 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Michelle2622017 wrote: »I log all calories.
When I use the "0 calorie" cooking spray, I count one mississippi, two mississippi, and use 20 calories per second.
The package says 0 cals per serving and that a serving is 1/4 of a second. Since up to 5 cals can be rounded to 0 cals, I am assuming that one serving is 4.999 or something equally annoying. 5 × 4 = 20.
So, that is why I use 20 cals per second.
Put a cold frying pan on the scale. Repeat your experiment. I've come up with approximately 1 gram per second which would make it about 9 calories for one of my seconds. Of course each person's subjective seconds could wvary
Our seconds are the same.
Seconded (pardon the pun). Seconds are the SI unit of time so there is nothing subjective about it at all.
"The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom"0 -
I compensate for cooking oils, diet drinks etc with exercise calories. I aim for between 1200-1300 calories a day in food and log as accurately as possible with scales etc but I know I have my exercise calories to back myself up0
-
SierraFatToSkinny wrote: »Personally, I wouldn't use Pam, I used this:
You can put in any oil you want, just have to pump it to create pressure in the canister.
I have one but it often ends up putting too much oil in the end compared to the PAM stuff...vespiquenn wrote: »vespiquenn wrote: »Right now? The amount of Nyquil/DayQuil I have been consuming adds up. It sucks.
Use the pills, lol.
DayQuil I typically do. The NyQuil pills don't work in the sleepy aspect, so I'm stuck gagging the syrup down.
They work wonders for me thankfully lol.0 -
MelanieCN77 wrote: »
the extra 78 calories can be overcome with an extra 1k steps.
I ran for 34 mins on my treadmill and my tracker gave me 512 calories burned, MMF gave me 425...I don't go by the treadmill burn...0 -
MelanieCN77 wrote: »
the extra 78 calories can be overcome with an extra 1k steps.
I ran for 34 mins on my treadmill and my tracker gave me 512 calories burned, MMF gave me 425...I don't go by the treadmill burn...
Just an FYI: Approximate calories burned walking = 0.3 x bodyweight (lbs) x distance (miles)0 -
trigden1991 wrote: »MelanieCN77 wrote: »
the extra 78 calories can be overcome with an extra 1k steps.
I ran for 34 mins on my treadmill and my tracker gave me 512 calories burned, MMF gave me 425...I don't go by the treadmill burn...
Just an FYI: Approximate calories burned walking = 0.3 x bodyweight (lbs) x distance (miles)
I used the formula to see how close it came to the estimate that I use to figure my calories burned while walking. It came out really close. I estimate 50 calories per mile...the formula gave me 59 calories per mile. When I used MFP exercise calculator it gave me 99 calories per mile.1 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »This is why I look fairly darkly at the FDA's guideline allowing anything with a 'serve' which is less than 5 calories to be rounded down to 0. When you combine that with the fact that USA labeling requirements only require the per serving information, it leads people to actually believe there are 0 calorie items - not to mention, they get entered into the database as 0 calories so no matter how many serves you add, it stays 0 in the food diary.
I know what you mean. I often look at a label thinking the calorie count is for 1 serving but the other day I bought corn tortillas and the serving size was 1&1/4 tortilla??? who eats 1&1/4 of a small corn tortilla? Alternatively I bought Naan thinking it was 190 calories until I checked and that was for 1/2 of a piece. Silly games in my opinion.
5 -
trigden1991 wrote: »MelanieCN77 wrote: »
the extra 78 calories can be overcome with an extra 1k steps.
I ran for 34 mins on my treadmill and my tracker gave me 512 calories burned, MMF gave me 425...I don't go by the treadmill burn...
Just an FYI: Approximate calories burned walking = 0.3 x bodyweight (lbs) x distance (miles)
For flat terrain only though!5 -
okay but what about running?trigden1991 wrote: »MelanieCN77 wrote: »
the extra 78 calories can be overcome with an extra 1k steps.
I ran for 34 mins on my treadmill and my tracker gave me 512 calories burned, MMF gave me 425...I don't go by the treadmill burn...
Just an FYI: Approximate calories burned walking = 0.3 x bodyweight (lbs) x distance (miles)
My point was that 78 calories are easy enough to burn off with a little tiny bit of effort...so for me to log pam is not going to happen...will is eat into my deficit...no because I am very active.0 -
okay but what about running?trigden1991 wrote: »MelanieCN77 wrote: »
the extra 78 calories can be overcome with an extra 1k steps.
I ran for 34 mins on my treadmill and my tracker gave me 512 calories burned, MMF gave me 425...I don't go by the treadmill burn...
Just an FYI: Approximate calories burned walking = 0.3 x bodyweight (lbs) x distance (miles)
My point was that 78 calories are easy enough to burn off with a little tiny bit of effort...so for me to log pam is not going to happen...will is eat into my deficit...no because I am very active.
Running is approximately double so 0.6 in the equation.
I fully agree with you, didn't mean to derail the thread too much. I would have to walk just over a mile to burn that off which is not much effort at all.1 -
If u can sleep better at night knowing you have 5 cals logged, go for itMaxematics wrote: »I see no reason not to log everything to the best of my ability and to eat the maximum calories that are compatible with my goals!
If it raises your cortisol levels... go ahead and don't log it.
My cortisol if much happier knowing that I've logged my 9 Cal of cinnamon and 18 Cal of Pam and 4 Cal of pepper and 18 Cal of coffee.
And that no calorie will remain unaccounted for or for that matter un-eaten without good reason!
Exactly this. I log everything, even my gum as it's 5 calories per piece. It doesn't stress me out one bit to do so and takes a second to do. The more accurate my data is, the happier I am.
2 -
trigden1991 wrote: »
okay but what about running?trigden1991 wrote: »MelanieCN77 wrote: »
the extra 78 calories can be overcome with an extra 1k steps.
I ran for 34 mins on my treadmill and my tracker gave me 512 calories burned, MMF gave me 425...I don't go by the treadmill burn...
Just an FYI: Approximate calories burned walking = 0.3 x bodyweight (lbs) x distance (miles)
My point was that 78 calories are easy enough to burn off with a little tiny bit of effort...so for me to log pam is not going to happen...will is eat into my deficit...no because I am very active.
Running is approximately double so 0.6 in the equation.
I fully agree with you, didn't mean to derail the thread too much. I would have to walk just over a mile to burn that off which is not much effort at all.
me either just finding this interesting...I am going to have to not track on MMF today for my run and see what my tracker gives me for calories burned for a run....0 -
Maybe it would be easier to ditch the cooking spray and just measure out your oil then.
I use cooking spray sometimes but not that much.1 -
I also don't log those smaller items: PAM, Hot sauce, Coffee etc.
I actually adjusted my calories to have a 100cal "margin of error" so that if I mislog or something like cake (which we never really know for sure) I have that cushion already in my daily logging. I also don't eat back exercise calories which helps account for this also!0 -
There are several examples like this that some people log, and some don't.
I was happy with my progress and logging, and don't personally sweat some things that others will unless I eat a lot of it. Some will judge me for it, but I lost 70 lbs so I was okay with my approach, while also understanding why some people might feel different. If I ever stopped losing without explanation, the first thing I would do would be to tighten up these areas.
Some examples that some weigh:
There are some who weigh pre-packaged foods. Is that snickers bar really the 52g it claims it is?
Bread- many here will weigh every slice, and with good reason. Most slices weigh more than the serving size indicates. That could mean 10+ more calories per slice.
Eggs- being that they aren't portioned in a factory obviously don't all weigh the same. So there's room for a few calorie difference between them.
Fruit- whats a medium banana anyway?
Spices- already said
Coffee- some places/brands actually call each 8oz cup 5 calories.
The greater room for error, in my opinion, is in eating out. The difference in one chain's "scoop of rice" could be very different than another location, leading to a difference of 50 calories or more.0 -
brightsideofpink wrote: »There are several examples like this that some people log, and some don't.
I was happy with my progress and logging, and don't personally sweat some things that others will unless I eat a lot of it. Some will judge me for it, but I lost 70 lbs so I was okay with my approach, while also understanding why some people might feel different. If I ever stopped losing without explanation, the first thing I would do would be to tighten up these areas.
Some examples that some weigh:
There are some who weigh pre-packaged foods. Is that snickers bar really the 52g it claims it is?
Bread- many here will weigh every slice, and with good reason. Most slices weigh more than the serving size indicates. That could mean 10+ more calories per slice.
Eggs- being that they aren't portioned in a factory obviously don't all weigh the same. So there's room for a few calorie difference between them.
Fruit- whats a medium banana anyway?
Spices- already said
Coffee- some places/brands actually call each 8oz cup 5 calories.
The greater room for error, in my opinion, is in eating out. The difference in one chain's "scoop of rice" could be very different than another location, leading to a difference of 50 calories or more.
IMO it's when you rely on Fitbits and such to estimate your TDEE that you really want to be accurate... 100 extra calories here and there might be a big deal if your fitbit says that you burn 1500 calories a day and you're trying to lose by eating 1300. I mean, when I was guessing my TDEE, 100 calories was not a huge deal - it's like a 15 minutes walk. But now that I use a fitbit again and tend to rely on that, I can't really afford to be off too much in my logging - because my fitbit will register that 15 minutes walk.
I DO like to weigh items I'm not familiar with to check for inaccuracies though - Graze snacks for example can be off by 70 calories sometimes.0 -
How about not spraying oil on your pain, and just measuring out a few grams of butter or something? Everything seems to come in a can in America.1
-
lemonychild wrote: »If u can sleep better at night knowing you have 5 cals logged, go for itMaxematics wrote: »I see no reason not to log everything to the best of my ability and to eat the maximum calories that are compatible with my goals!
If it raises your cortisol levels... go ahead and don't log it.
My cortisol if much happier knowing that I've logged my 9 Cal of cinnamon and 18 Cal of Pam and 4 Cal of pepper and 18 Cal of coffee.
And that no calorie will remain unaccounted for or for that matter un-eaten without good reason!
Exactly this. I log everything, even my gum as it's 5 calories per piece. It doesn't stress me out one bit to do so and takes a second to do. The more accurate my data is, the happier I am.
That seems like unnecessary snark. I can easily chew up to 30 calories of gum per day and would like to account for it. I'd account for 30 calories of a cookie or strawberries. I'm not trying to lose weight and I'm trying to find my maintenance calories so keeping my data as accurate as possible is important for me. I don't tell other people to log gum, so if I do it, why does it bother other people?5 -
Might be time to pick up a better pan if it requires more than a quick spray.0
-
MelanieCN77 wrote: »
the extra 78 calories can be overcome with an extra 1k steps.
I ran for 34 mins on my treadmill and my tracker gave me 512 calories burned, MMF gave me 425...I don't go by the treadmill burn...
One size doesn't fit all, which was kinda my point. Suggesting that anyone can burn 250 cals by taking 1,000 steps is silly.
I don't know what MMF is but I use Apple Watch.0 -
MelanieCN77 wrote: »MelanieCN77 wrote: »
the extra 78 calories can be overcome with an extra 1k steps.
I ran for 34 mins on my treadmill and my tracker gave me 512 calories burned, MMF gave me 425...I don't go by the treadmill burn...
One size doesn't fit all, which was kinda my point. Suggesting that anyone can burn 250 cals by taking 1,000 steps is silly.
I don't know what MMF is but I use Apple Watch.
where did I say you can burn 250 calories in 1k steps...I said 78 could be overcome with an extra 1k steps...
MMF is map my fitness..and I use a tracker as well.
0 -
hellobaconplease wrote: »How about not spraying oil on your pain, and just measuring out a few grams of butter or something? Everything seems to come in a can in America.
Because butter will burn at high temperatures. Nothing wrong with oil.* If you don't want to spray it, put a little on a paper towel (or cloth) and rub the pan with the paper towel.
*Nothing wrong with butter either - but you usually have to combine with with a little oil or cook at lower temperatures to prevent the burning.1 -
3 oz of pam spray is 3 oz of canola oil... That's like taking shots of canola oil...0
-
It might not be as high as 26 calories. A one-second spray should have about 9 calories. I use a spray that is 7 calories for a 1-second spray.
Yep, I log all the calories. I agree, they can add up. And if I don't have time to be super accurate, or I'm accidentally inaccurate, or miss 26 calories, whatever, that's nothing to stress about.0 -
If you have a small deficit or are not losing, then looking for hidden calories or other ways to improve your accuracy: good idea. Many times in the past I've done a pretty generic spray/3 seconds log for something like this. I don't time or weigh it, but if I'm going for high accuracy I figure logging something for it is better than logging nothing. And it does not all go on the food.
But yes, 0 cal foods do have cals, just not enough in a single 'serving' to make them have to report it. Kind of a marketing gimick I think, as if you make the serving size small enough everything is under .5g and rounds down.2 -
Maybe 1k steps out, and 1k steps back again? And repeat 4x. Brisk walk puts me about 4 cals/minute beyond my BMR so to burn off an extra 250 cals I'm looking at an hour of walking.
When I was first losing I was highly accurate. Now I approximate more but think my approximations make up for some of the little calories that get overlooked. Like when I add parmesean cheese to veggies to bake in the oven: I weigh out 4-5g and log that. But some of it stays in the pan, not to be consumed.MelanieCN77 wrote: »
0 -
MelanieCN77 wrote: »MelanieCN77 wrote: »
the extra 78 calories can be overcome with an extra 1k steps.
I ran for 34 mins on my treadmill and my tracker gave me 512 calories burned, MMF gave me 425...I don't go by the treadmill burn...
One size doesn't fit all, which was kinda my point. Suggesting that anyone can burn 250 cals by taking 1,000 steps is silly.
I don't know what MMF is but I use Apple Watch.
where did I say you can burn 250 calories in 1k steps...I said 78 could be overcome with an extra 1k steps...
MMF is map my fitness..and I use a tracker as well.
You didn't, I was replying to somebody else who did say that and then you jumped in. It's up there in this quote nest if you expand it.0 -
Meh, that is an over kill and way too much time consuming.
I don't log spices unless they are part of my recipe and only because I want to remember what I used; not for the calories. I don't log any vitamins and supplements or Pam/vegetable spray. I don't log chewing gum or any cough drop or medicine. I didn' do it when I was losing and I am not doing it now that I am on maintenance.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions