Boiled Egg vs Fried Egg!

2»

Replies

  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,179 Member
    The USDA database has egg, raw and egg. fried. The fried egg in the database has about 2 grams of fat worth of extra calories. That may well be worth it to you for the flavor. It certainly is to me.
  • JoRocka
    JoRocka Posts: 17,525 Member
    Decten1988 wrote: »
    Without coconut oil, less calories.

    not everyone needs "less" calories.

    some people are managing their weight or trying to put weight on.
  • Christine_72
    Christine_72 Posts: 16,049 Member
    edited June 2017
    crazyravr wrote: »
    JeromeBarry1 wrote: »
    The USDA database has egg, raw and egg. fried. The fried egg in the database has about 2 grams of fat worth of extra calories. That may well be worth it to you for the flavor. It certainly is to me.

    Think about it. FRIED egg, and only extra 2g of fat? How is this even possible? Makes no sense to me.

    They may be using 2ml of oil... Whats that, a drop maybe? :open_mouth:
  • middlehaitch
    middlehaitch Posts: 8,486 Member
    Well if you are going to fry eggs in duck or bacon fat you have to do mushrooms too so all that tasty fat is soaked up :)
    (Alternate fry a slice of bread for the egg to sit on)

    If concerned about how much of the fat in the pan you actually are eating put the pan on the scale, add fat, note weight. Cook and remove egg(s), weigh pan with surplus fat. The difference is how many g of fat was eaten.

    I like the first option best.

    Cheers, h.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    crazyravr wrote: »
    JeromeBarry1 wrote: »
    The USDA database has egg, raw and egg. fried. The fried egg in the database has about 2 grams of fat worth of extra calories. That may well be worth it to you for the flavor. It certainly is to me.

    Think about it. FRIED egg, and only extra 2g of fat? How is this even possible? Makes no sense to me.

    Non-stick pan, could involve no added oil. A spray, very little.
  • nissarayna
    nissarayna Posts: 70 Member
    To switch up from boiled egg I choose poached on toast.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited June 2017
    Love poached egg -- I really should have it more often. I mostly alternate between fried in some fashion (over easy or sunny side up) or an omelet. I HATE peeling eggs, which is my only issue with hard boiled.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited June 2017
    crazyravr wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    crazyravr wrote: »
    JeromeBarry1 wrote: »
    The USDA database has egg, raw and egg. fried. The fried egg in the database has about 2 grams of fat worth of extra calories. That may well be worth it to you for the flavor. It certainly is to me.

    Think about it. FRIED egg, and only extra 2g of fat? How is this even possible? Makes no sense to me.

    Non-stick pan, could involve no added oil. A spray, very little.

    But then its not fried. Just like anything "air fried" has nothing ZERO to do with actual frying.

    A fried egg is an egg cooked in a pan on top of the stove. Even the dictionary definition of fried (not related specifically to eggs) says "usually in fat or oil." With eggs specifically, I think it's a fried egg whether you use oil or butter or some other fat or not, or else what else would it be called (beyond sunny side up or over easy)? It's the way the egg is cooked (again, broken into a pan on top of the stove and not mixed about vs. being poached or scrambled or hard boiled).

    Are you thinking that "fried" = "deep fried" which no one does to eggs, to my knowledge?
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,097 Member
    edited June 2017
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    crazyravr wrote: »
    JeromeBarry1 wrote: »
    The USDA database has egg, raw and egg. fried. The fried egg in the database has about 2 grams of fat worth of extra calories. That may well be worth it to you for the flavor. It certainly is to me.

    Think about it. FRIED egg, and only extra 2g of fat? How is this even possible? Makes no sense to me.

    Non-stick pan, could involve no added oil. A spray, very little.

    That's almost 1/2 a teaspoon of oil (**ETA: the upthread post referred to 2 g of fat**). I don't use sprays, and I could fry an egg in 1/2 a tsp of oil in a good nonstick pan. The only hard part would be controlling the flow from the bottle to get that little out.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    lynn_glenmont wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    crazyravr wrote: »
    JeromeBarry1 wrote: »
    The USDA database has egg, raw and egg. fried. The fried egg in the database has about 2 grams of fat worth of extra calories. That may well be worth it to you for the flavor. It certainly is to me.

    Think about it. FRIED egg, and only extra 2g of fat? How is this even possible? Makes no sense to me.

    Non-stick pan, could involve no added oil. A spray, very little.

    That's almost 1/2 a teaspoon of oil (**ETA: the upthread post referred to 2 g of fat**). I don't use sprays, and I could fry an egg in 1/2 a tsp of oil in a good nonstick pan. The only hard part would be controlling the flow from the bottle to get that little out.

    Agree. Actually, what I normally do is fry 2 eggs in a tsp of oil, which averages out.

    I don't think the difference in the USDA entries is due to oil, though, and I do find it a little puzzling.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories