Diary review
Options
Replies
-
Just an additional thing you may want to think about: people have brought up that your logging may not be as accurate as you think and you mentioned that you've been doing this for a while and have lost 64 pounds already (awesome accomplishment!!). Having a few inaccuracies in logging is going to be much less of a factor when you're heavier. As you've slimmed down, you have to be much more precise to maintain your rate of loss. Weighing vs measuring is a *kitten*. I added relish to a tuna salad recipe last week and was supposed to get a tablespoon serving for 25 calories; I plopped a measured tablespoon into the bowl on the food scale and it was nearly twice the weight listed as a serving in grams. In more calorically dense foods, that does a lot more damage. Same thing happened to me with protein powder. A "heaping scoop" is supposed to be 120 kcals. Yeah - no. An actual 120 kcal serving by weight wasn't even a completely full scoop.
Alcohol can be doing some negative things to the scale. While it shouldn't matter for fat loss, if you are in a deficit, it could be making you retain more water and leading to you not seeing the scale move like it should. If you drink a pint of whiskey every weekend, that could be stalling you a lot. You also mentioned take-away food - there is literally no way to be 100% sure how many calories are in a dish. Someone mentioned on another thread the huge difference between restaurant calorie lists and what they could make a home. A homemade chicken and veggies dish for 350 cals vs. a similar sized dish at a chain restaurant for 600+ (and that's assuming that the line cook made it exactly to standard).
The sad truth is that you cannot outwork a bad diet (that was a hard lesson for me to learn). You can climb, run, and get in loads of steps each day and still not be burning enough kcals to make up for a bad diet (I have no idea what you eat, as I haven't seen your diary). I don't know your stats, but a sustained 1k cal deficit is super difficult if you're not very obese, especially considering that you're active enough to NEED to eat more food.
Very insightfull, can I add you as a freind and you can see my dairy? Im not to keen on it being public any more.
Had not comsidered water wieght. If I have a curry I usually stick in 1200-1400 quick add or something.0 -
I have put my stride and running stride up by a few inches to take off some of the cals burned.0
-
Just an additional thing you may want to think about: people have brought up that your logging may not be as accurate as you think and you mentioned that you've been doing this for a while and have lost 64 pounds already (awesome accomplishment!!). Having a few inaccuracies in logging is going to be much less of a factor when you're heavier. As you've slimmed down, you have to be much more precise to maintain your rate of loss. Weighing vs measuring is a *kitten*. I added relish to a tuna salad recipe last week and was supposed to get a tablespoon serving for 25 calories; I plopped a measured tablespoon into the bowl on the food scale and it was nearly twice the weight listed as a serving in grams. In more calorically dense foods, that does a lot more damage. Same thing happened to me with protein powder. A "heaping scoop" is supposed to be 120 kcals. Yeah - no. An actual 120 kcal serving by weight wasn't even a completely full scoop.
Alcohol can be doing some negative things to the scale. While it shouldn't matter for fat loss, if you are in a deficit, it could be making you retain more water and leading to you not seeing the scale move like it should. If you drink a pint of whiskey every weekend, that could be stalling you a lot. You also mentioned take-away food - there is literally no way to be 100% sure how many calories are in a dish. Someone mentioned on another thread the huge difference between restaurant calorie lists and what they could make a home. A homemade chicken and veggies dish for 350 cals vs. a similar sized dish at a chain restaurant for 600+ (and that's assuming that the line cook made it exactly to standard).
The sad truth is that you cannot outwork a bad diet (that was a hard lesson for me to learn). You can climb, run, and get in loads of steps each day and still not be burning enough kcals to make up for a bad diet (I have no idea what you eat, as I haven't seen your diary). I don't know your stats, but a sustained 1k cal deficit is super difficult if you're not very obese, especially considering that you're active enough to NEED to eat more food.
Very insightfull, can I add you as a freind and you can see my dairy? Im not to keen on it being public any more.
Had not comsidered water wieght. If I have a curry I usually stick in 1200-1400 quick add or something.
Sure.0 -
alcohol is processed(metabolized) by the body before fat or anything else.so food,fat and other things take a back seat to alcohol.so yeah alcohol will matter temporary for fat loss and he could be underlogging the alcohol unless it says how much of a serving and the calories on the label, and from a lot of labels I have looked at for different types of alcohol there are no serving sizes or calories. so those things can varyJ
Alcohol can be doing some negative things to the scale. While it shouldn't matter for fat loss, if you are in a deficit, it could be making you retain more water and leading to you not seeing the scale move like it should. If you drink a pint of whiskey every weekend, that could be stalling you a lot. You also mentioned take-away food .
2 -
Just an additional thing you may want to think about: people have brought up that your logging may not be as accurate as you think and you mentioned that you've been doing this for a while and have lost 64 pounds already (awesome accomplishment!!). Having a few inaccuracies in logging is going to be much less of a factor when you're heavier. As you've slimmed down, you have to be much more precise to maintain your rate of loss. Weighing vs measuring is a *kitten*. I added relish to a tuna salad recipe last week and was supposed to get a tablespoon serving for 25 calories; I plopped a measured tablespoon into the bowl on the food scale and it was nearly twice the weight listed as a serving in grams. In more calorically dense foods, that does a lot more damage. Same thing happened to me with protein powder. A "heaping scoop" is supposed to be 120 kcals. Yeah - no. An actual 120 kcal serving by weight wasn't even a completely full scoop.
Alcohol can be doing some negative things to the scale. While it shouldn't matter for fat loss, if you are in a deficit, it could be making you retain more water and leading to you not seeing the scale move like it should. If you drink a pint of whiskey every weekend, that could be stalling you a lot. You also mentioned take-away food - there is literally no way to be 100% sure how many calories are in a dish. Someone mentioned on another thread the huge difference between restaurant calorie lists and what they could make a home. A homemade chicken and veggies dish for 350 cals vs. a similar sized dish at a chain restaurant for 600+ (and that's assuming that the line cook made it exactly to standard).
The sad truth is that you cannot outwork a bad diet (that was a hard lesson for me to learn). You can climb, run, and get in loads of steps each day and still not be burning enough kcals to make up for a bad diet (I have no idea what you eat, as I haven't seen your diary). I don't know your stats, but a sustained 1k cal deficit is super difficult if you're not very obese, especially considering that you're active enough to NEED to eat more food.
Very insightfull, can I add you as a freind and you can see my dairy? Im not to keen on it being public any more.
Had not comsidered water wieght. If I have a curry I usually stick in 1200-1400 quick add or something.
So, I noticed a couple of things that you might want to double check. I think you may be using bad database entries. Example: you log chicken breast as roughly 110 cals per 100g. The actual nutrition is more like 165 calories. Just last Tuesday, this threw off your logging by over 300 calories more that you thought. Several of your entries seem to be home-made or user generated. Beware of any math that you don't do yourself. Even if you scan the package of something, a user can have tagged it incorrectly. Look for verified entries with the little green check mark - those are usually more accurate than other options. As previously mentioned, weigh everything - don't trust packaging to be accurate, or even consistent with some products. A LOT of MFP users suffer from wishful thinking when it comes to calorie counts and unfortunately, they add things to the database that mess it up for everyone else
.
Also, I think that you should be careful about the curries and the whiskey. By all mean indulge and enjoy, and I don't think once a week is too often by any means, but you have no idea how much sodium or fat the restaurant is putting in that curry to make it extra tasty. Do you eat it with rice or potatoes? If you can, it's worth measuring those as closely as possible and logging it as a separate food rather than one total 'quick add'. Even then, the cook may have used extra oil or butter and just one tbsp (which isn't even all that much when you're cooking) of either of those is an extra 100+ calories.
ETA: I mention sodium in the curry as that will make you retain extra water, especially if you consume alcohol on the same day. Also, if you're eating in an overall deficit it won't matter, but it's worth noting that the body metabolizes booze before it works on anything else, so if you drink on the same days that you're having much higher than normal calorie foods, it will take longer for the body to burning up those extra food calories than if you did not drink. You'll eventually get there in a deficit, but it may not be the most efficient path.
Edit 2: On June 8, you log 202 grams of Sirloin as 347 calories. That's another example of a bad database entry. It should be 493 calories.3 -
amyrebeccah wrote: »In addition to everything else you've been (wisely) told, when did you start taking creatine?
3 weeks ago roughly0 -
Just an additional thing you may want to think about: people have brought up that your logging may not be as accurate as you think and you mentioned that you've been doing this for a while and have lost 64 pounds already (awesome accomplishment!!). Having a few inaccuracies in logging is going to be much less of a factor when you're heavier. As you've slimmed down, you have to be much more precise to maintain your rate of loss. Weighing vs measuring is a *kitten*. I added relish to a tuna salad recipe last week and was supposed to get a tablespoon serving for 25 calories; I plopped a measured tablespoon into the bowl on the food scale and it was nearly twice the weight listed as a serving in grams. In more calorically dense foods, that does a lot more damage. Same thing happened to me with protein powder. A "heaping scoop" is supposed to be 120 kcals. Yeah - no. An actual 120 kcal serving by weight wasn't even a completely full scoop.
Alcohol can be doing some negative things to the scale. While it shouldn't matter for fat loss, if you are in a deficit, it could be making you retain more water and leading to you not seeing the scale move like it should. If you drink a pint of whiskey every weekend, that could be stalling you a lot. You also mentioned take-away food - there is literally no way to be 100% sure how many calories are in a dish. Someone mentioned on another thread the huge difference between restaurant calorie lists and what they could make a home. A homemade chicken and veggies dish for 350 cals vs. a similar sized dish at a chain restaurant for 600+ (and that's assuming that the line cook made it exactly to standard).
The sad truth is that you cannot outwork a bad diet (that was a hard lesson for me to learn). You can climb, run, and get in loads of steps each day and still not be burning enough kcals to make up for a bad diet (I have no idea what you eat, as I haven't seen your diary). I don't know your stats, but a sustained 1k cal deficit is super difficult if you're not very obese, especially considering that you're active enough to NEED to eat more food.
Very insightfull, can I add you as a freind and you can see my dairy? Im not to keen on it being public any more.
Had not comsidered water wieght. If I have a curry I usually stick in 1200-1400 quick add or something.
So, I noticed a couple of things that you might want to double check. I think you may be using bad database entries. Example: you log chicken breast as roughly 110 cals per 100g. The actual nutrition is more like 165 calories. Just last Tuesday, this threw off your logging by over 300 calories more that you thought. Several of your entries seem to be home-made or user generated. Beware of any math that you don't do yourself. Even if you scan the package of something, a user can have tagged it incorrectly. Look for verified entries with the little green check mark - those are usually more accurate than other options. As previously mentioned, weigh everything - don't trust packaging to be accurate, or even consistent with some products. A LOT of MFP users suffer from wishful thinking when it comes to calorie counts and unfortunately, they add things to the database that mess it up for everyone else.
Also, I think that you should be careful about the curries and the whiskey. By all mean indulge and enjoy, and I don't think once a week is too often by any means, but you have no idea how much sodium or fat the restaurant is putting in that curry to make it extra tasty. Do you eat it with rice or potatoes? If you can, it's worth measuring those as closely as possible and logging it as a separate food rather than one total 'quick add'. Even then, the cook may have used extra oil or butter and just one tbsp (which isn't even all that much when you're cooking) of either of those is an extra 100+ calories.
ETA: I mention sodium in the curry as that will make you retain extra water, especially if you consume alcohol on the same day. Also, if you're eating in an overall deficit it won't matter, but it's worth noting that the body metabolizes booze before it works on anything else, so if you drink on the same days that you're having much higher than normal calorie foods, it will take longer for the body to burning up those extra food calories than if you did not drink. You'll eventually get there in a deficit, but it may not be the most efficient path.
Edit 2: On June 8, you log 202 grams of Sirloin as 347 calories. That's another example of a bad database entry. It should be 493 calories.
thanks for your input its appreciated.1 -
Just an additional thing you may want to think about: people have brought up that your logging may not be as accurate as you think and you mentioned that you've been doing this for a while and have lost 64 pounds already (awesome accomplishment!!). Having a few inaccuracies in logging is going to be much less of a factor when you're heavier. As you've slimmed down, you have to be much more precise to maintain your rate of loss. Weighing vs measuring is a *kitten*. I added relish to a tuna salad recipe last week and was supposed to get a tablespoon serving for 25 calories; I plopped a measured tablespoon into the bowl on the food scale and it was nearly twice the weight listed as a serving in grams. In more calorically dense foods, that does a lot more damage. Same thing happened to me with protein powder. A "heaping scoop" is supposed to be 120 kcals. Yeah - no. An actual 120 kcal serving by weight wasn't even a completely full scoop.
Alcohol can be doing some negative things to the scale. While it shouldn't matter for fat loss, if you are in a deficit, it could be making you retain more water and leading to you not seeing the scale move like it should. If you drink a pint of whiskey every weekend, that could be stalling you a lot. You also mentioned take-away food - there is literally no way to be 100% sure how many calories are in a dish. Someone mentioned on another thread the huge difference between restaurant calorie lists and what they could make a home. A homemade chicken and veggies dish for 350 cals vs. a similar sized dish at a chain restaurant for 600+ (and that's assuming that the line cook made it exactly to standard).
The sad truth is that you cannot outwork a bad diet (that was a hard lesson for me to learn). You can climb, run, and get in loads of steps each day and still not be burning enough kcals to make up for a bad diet (I have no idea what you eat, as I haven't seen your diary). I don't know your stats, but a sustained 1k cal deficit is super difficult if you're not very obese, especially considering that you're active enough to NEED to eat more food.
Very insightfull, can I add you as a freind and you can see my dairy? Im not to keen on it being public any more.
Had not comsidered water wieght. If I have a curry I usually stick in 1200-1400 quick add or something.
So, I noticed a couple of things that you might want to double check. I think you may be using bad database entries. Example: you log chicken breast as roughly 110 cals per 100g. The actual nutrition is more like 165 calories. Just last Tuesday, this threw off your logging by over 300 calories more that you thought. Several of your entries seem to be home-made or user generated. Beware of any math that you don't do yourself. Even if you scan the package of something, a user can have tagged it incorrectly. Look for verified entries with the little green check mark - those are usually more accurate than other options. As previously mentioned, weigh everything - don't trust packaging to be accurate, or even consistent with some products. A LOT of MFP users suffer from wishful thinking when it comes to calorie counts and unfortunately, they add things to the database that mess it up for everyone else.
Also, I think that you should be careful about the curries and the whiskey. By all mean indulge and enjoy, and I don't think once a week is too often by any means, but you have no idea how much sodium or fat the restaurant is putting in that curry to make it extra tasty. Do you eat it with rice or potatoes? If you can, it's worth measuring those as closely as possible and logging it as a separate food rather than one total 'quick add'. Even then, the cook may have used extra oil or butter and just one tbsp (which isn't even all that much when you're cooking) of either of those is an extra 100+ calories.
ETA: I mention sodium in the curry as that will make you retain extra water, especially if you consume alcohol on the same day. Also, if you're eating in an overall deficit it won't matter, but it's worth noting that the body metabolizes booze before it works on anything else, so if you drink on the same days that you're having much higher than normal calorie foods, it will take longer for the body to burning up those extra food calories than if you did not drink. You'll eventually get there in a deficit, but it may not be the most efficient path.
Edit 2: On June 8, you log 202 grams of Sirloin as 347 calories. That's another example of a bad database entry. It should be 493 calories.
thanks for your input
Np. Good luck!0 -
amyrebeccah wrote: »amyrebeccah wrote: »In addition to everything else you've been (wisely) told, when did you start taking creatine?
3 weeks ago roughly
So based on your comments that you've had a good loss until recently, it is possible that water retention from the creatine is also a factor.
Should have been fully saturated after week one so still expecting a loss after that week.
I get ya though, ill drop the whisky out of a sat see if it makes a difference. It is hard to maintain without having one night off in the long term.
Na ive lost in in chunks rather than in one go over a few years, just this time its not effective even after switching to clean eating and working out 5 times a week.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »kommodevaran wrote: »Are you weighing and logging everything you eat? Double checking database entries? Hitting calorie goal? Set calorie goal to weight loss? Not forgetting anything when you log? No cheat days? No eating back 100% of exercise calories?
How long have you been doing what you are doing? How often do you weigh yourself? Do you weigh yourself consistently (same scales, place, time, clothes)?
Your diary isn't open. Go to http://www.myfitnesspal.com/account/diary_settings set to "public".
i log everything to the gram and use a hr monitor, ivr lost about 5 stone over the years so im not a beginner ( without sounding rude)
ive never done this much training b4 in my life imho
I see some things measured in scoops, fillets, cups, container, or by the piece (1 tortilla). Are these items also being weighed and you're just choosing a different unit of measure?
scanned packet, cals are exact.
the scoops are the ones that come with the protien powder they are to weight
Packets of food can legally have a variance between what is in the package and what is listed (at least in the US, where I am). I've seen significant differences for packaged foods, differences that would have escaped me if I was just scanning instead of weighing.
When you say the scoop that comes with the protein powder, do you mean you are weighing out the portion to match the size of "1 scoop" that is listed on the label? I have also found big variance between what I can scoop out and what the weighed portion actually is.
they supply a 25g scoop leveled its 25g. ie 1 scoop
i use 2 per shake so about 45ish g protien
I'm sorry for asking again, but just to be clear: you're weighing the contents to 25 grams and then just logging it as a scoop? Because a scoop isn't for weight, it's for volume?
When I have personally tested the contents of a scoop versus the "same amount" (that is, what I would expect from the scoop) weighed out, the scoop always gives me more. If I went by the scoop, I would be consuming more calories than I thought it was. If you eat products like this daily (and it looks like you do), that could be enough to cause an issue for you.
one scoop weighs 25g
A scoop of my protein powder weighs betweeb 20 and 30 grams but is supposed to be 25 grams. They try to be as accurate as possible but there will not be the same weight everytime. The amount a package hold can be 20% over what is listed.0 -
Just an additional thing you may want to think about: people have brought up that your logging may not be as accurate as you think and you mentioned that you've been doing this for a while and have lost 64 pounds already (awesome accomplishment!!). Having a few inaccuracies in logging is going to be much less of a factor when you're heavier. As you've slimmed down, you have to be much more precise to maintain your rate of loss. Weighing vs measuring is a *kitten*. I added relish to a tuna salad recipe last week and was supposed to get a tablespoon serving for 25 calories; I plopped a measured tablespoon into the bowl on the food scale and it was nearly twice the weight listed as a serving in grams. In more calorically dense foods, that does a lot more damage. Same thing happened to me with protein powder. A "heaping scoop" is supposed to be 120 kcals. Yeah - no. An actual 120 kcal serving by weight wasn't even a completely full scoop.
Alcohol can be doing some negative things to the scale. While it shouldn't matter for fat loss, if you are in a deficit, it could be making you retain more water and leading to you not seeing the scale move like it should. If you drink a pint of whiskey every weekend, that could be stalling you a lot. You also mentioned take-away food - there is literally no way to be 100% sure how many calories are in a dish. Someone mentioned on another thread the huge difference between restaurant calorie lists and what they could make a home. A homemade chicken and veggies dish for 350 cals vs. a similar sized dish at a chain restaurant for 600+ (and that's assuming that the line cook made it exactly to standard).
The sad truth is that you cannot outwork a bad diet (that was a hard lesson for me to learn). You can climb, run, and get in loads of steps each day and still not be burning enough kcals to make up for a bad diet (I have no idea what you eat, as I haven't seen your diary). I don't know your stats, but a sustained 1k cal deficit is super difficult if you're not very obese, especially considering that you're active enough to NEED to eat more food.
Very insightfull, can I add you as a freind and you can see my dairy? Im not to keen on it being public any more.
Had not comsidered water wieght. If I have a curry I usually stick in 1200-1400 quick add or something.
So, I noticed a couple of things that you might want to double check. I think you may be using bad database entries. Example: you log chicken breast as roughly 110 cals per 100g. The actual nutrition is more like 165 calories. Just last Tuesday, this threw off your logging by over 300 calories more that you thought. Several of your entries seem to be home-made or user generated. Beware of any math that you don't do yourself. Even if you scan the package of something, a user can have tagged it incorrectly. Look for verified entries with the little green check mark - those are usually more accurate than other options. As previously mentioned, weigh everything - don't trust packaging to be accurate, or even consistent with some products. A LOT of MFP users suffer from wishful thinking when it comes to calorie counts and unfortunately, they add things to the database that mess it up for everyone else.
Also, I think that you should be careful about the curries and the whiskey. By all mean indulge and enjoy, and I don't think once a week is too often by any means, but you have no idea how much sodium or fat the restaurant is putting in that curry to make it extra tasty. Do you eat it with rice or potatoes? If you can, it's worth measuring those as closely as possible and logging it as a separate food rather than one total 'quick add'. Even then, the cook may have used extra oil or butter and just one tbsp (which isn't even all that much when you're cooking) of either of those is an extra 100+ calories.
ETA: I mention sodium in the curry as that will make you retain extra water, especially if you consume alcohol on the same day. Also, if you're eating in an overall deficit it won't matter, but it's worth noting that the body metabolizes booze before it works on anything else, so if you drink on the same days that you're having much higher than normal calorie foods, it will take longer for the body to burning up those extra food calories than if you did not drink. You'll eventually get there in a deficit, but it may not be the most efficient path.
Edit 2: On June 8, you log 202 grams of Sirloin as 347 calories. That's another example of a bad database entry. It should be 493 calories.
even the green check marked entries can also be off.I already mentioned the part about the alcohol1 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Just an additional thing you may want to think about: people have brought up that your logging may not be as accurate as you think and you mentioned that you've been doing this for a while and have lost 64 pounds already (awesome accomplishment!!). Having a few inaccuracies in logging is going to be much less of a factor when you're heavier. As you've slimmed down, you have to be much more precise to maintain your rate of loss. Weighing vs measuring is a *kitten*. I added relish to a tuna salad recipe last week and was supposed to get a tablespoon serving for 25 calories; I plopped a measured tablespoon into the bowl on the food scale and it was nearly twice the weight listed as a serving in grams. In more calorically dense foods, that does a lot more damage. Same thing happened to me with protein powder. A "heaping scoop" is supposed to be 120 kcals. Yeah - no. An actual 120 kcal serving by weight wasn't even a completely full scoop.
Alcohol can be doing some negative things to the scale. While it shouldn't matter for fat loss, if you are in a deficit, it could be making you retain more water and leading to you not seeing the scale move like it should. If you drink a pint of whiskey every weekend, that could be stalling you a lot. You also mentioned take-away food - there is literally no way to be 100% sure how many calories are in a dish. Someone mentioned on another thread the huge difference between restaurant calorie lists and what they could make a home. A homemade chicken and veggies dish for 350 cals vs. a similar sized dish at a chain restaurant for 600+ (and that's assuming that the line cook made it exactly to standard).
The sad truth is that you cannot outwork a bad diet (that was a hard lesson for me to learn). You can climb, run, and get in loads of steps each day and still not be burning enough kcals to make up for a bad diet (I have no idea what you eat, as I haven't seen your diary). I don't know your stats, but a sustained 1k cal deficit is super difficult if you're not very obese, especially considering that you're active enough to NEED to eat more food.
Very insightfull, can I add you as a freind and you can see my dairy? Im not to keen on it being public any more.
Had not comsidered water wieght. If I have a curry I usually stick in 1200-1400 quick add or something.
So, I noticed a couple of things that you might want to double check. I think you may be using bad database entries. Example: you log chicken breast as roughly 110 cals per 100g. The actual nutrition is more like 165 calories. Just last Tuesday, this threw off your logging by over 300 calories more that you thought. Several of your entries seem to be home-made or user generated. Beware of any math that you don't do yourself. Even if you scan the package of something, a user can have tagged it incorrectly. Look for verified entries with the little green check mark - those are usually more accurate than other options. As previously mentioned, weigh everything - don't trust packaging to be accurate, or even consistent with some products. A LOT of MFP users suffer from wishful thinking when it comes to calorie counts and unfortunately, they add things to the database that mess it up for everyone else.
Also, I think that you should be careful about the curries and the whiskey. By all mean indulge and enjoy, and I don't think once a week is too often by any means, but you have no idea how much sodium or fat the restaurant is putting in that curry to make it extra tasty. Do you eat it with rice or potatoes? If you can, it's worth measuring those as closely as possible and logging it as a separate food rather than one total 'quick add'. Even then, the cook may have used extra oil or butter and just one tbsp (which isn't even all that much when you're cooking) of either of those is an extra 100+ calories.
ETA: I mention sodium in the curry as that will make you retain extra water, especially if you consume alcohol on the same day. Also, if you're eating in an overall deficit it won't matter, but it's worth noting that the body metabolizes booze before it works on anything else, so if you drink on the same days that you're having much higher than normal calorie foods, it will take longer for the body to burning up those extra food calories than if you did not drink. You'll eventually get there in a deficit, but it may not be the most efficient path.
Edit 2: On June 8, you log 202 grams of Sirloin as 347 calories. That's another example of a bad database entry. It should be 493 calories.
even the green check marked entries can also be off.I already mentioned the part about the alcohol
For sure! I tend to look for the one with the most verified, but the database is full of so many errors, that you have to be really careful.
And, yikes! I totally missed that you already explained the alcohol part - you did a much better job that I did
0 -
you mentioned wrong calories for chicken and steak - those are for raw meats. they weigh more pre cooked due to water, and therefore have less calories per 100g.
Raw 100g and cooked 100g have different nutritional values.0 -
abetterme9366 wrote: »
google 100g raw and 100g cooked im not your science teacher
cooked obviously has higher calories per 100g cause it has less water adding weight1 -
you mentioned wrong calories for chicken and steak - those are for raw meats. they weigh more pre cooked due to water, and therefore have less calories per 100g.
Raw 100g and cooked 100g have different nutritional values.
I stand corrected on the chicken, I didn't go back and look at the steak. I don't remember if your diary said raw or cooked, but yes the raw weight is 120 kcal /100 grams, so you're only about 10 off.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 394 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 939 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions