Seasoning Calories
kalagaraz
Posts: 11 Member
So... was bored and read the ingredient label on the seasoning I usually drown my chicken in and see that it contains Brown Sugar, however serving size is 0 calories. I put quite a bit of this on my chicken so I assume I am getting quite a few calories out of this. Do you guys track calories for things like this?
My Seasoning
If we assume its 181 grams of pure brown sugar, thats 690 calories unaccounted for
I think ingredient labels have to list from highest weight to lowest weight. so would that been since there are 5 ingredients before brown sugar, at most there could only be 30g of brown sugar?
My Seasoning
If we assume its 181 grams of pure brown sugar, thats 690 calories unaccounted for
I think ingredient labels have to list from highest weight to lowest weight. so would that been since there are 5 ingredients before brown sugar, at most there could only be 30g of brown sugar?
0
Replies
-
I'm sure the amount you would use would only impart a few calories which would be negligible.1
-
Zero calories like the label you supplied shows means zero calories. I am not sure where you are getting 690 calories from. Almost none of the seasonings I personally use regularly contain calories either, so I do not bother logging them. I generally don't bother logging anything that does not contain calories (diet coke, is another example), but I know some people who do. Personal preference.0
-
JustRobby1 wrote: »Zero calories like the label you supplied shows means zero calories. I am not sure where you are getting 690 calories from. Almost none of the seasonings I personally use regularly contain calories either, so I do not bother logging them. I generally don't bother logging anything that does not contain calories (diet coke, is another example), but I know some people who do. Personal preference.
In order to make foods "zero calories" lot of companies decrease the serving size. Anything labeled zero calories can contain as much as 5 calories per serving. So they reduce serving size till its under 5 calories then smack zero calorie label on it. So this contains 181 servings which could be potentially 181 * 5 calories (905 calories). It contains brown sugar, so it DEFINITLY is not zero calories.2 -
no- but I pretty much only use salt, pepper, crushed red pepper flakes and garlic.
0 -
JustRobby1 wrote: »Zero calories like the label you supplied shows means zero calories. I am not sure where you are getting 690 calories from. Almost none of the seasonings I personally use regularly contain calories either, so I do not bother logging them. I generally don't bother logging anything that does not contain calories (diet coke, is another example), but I know some people who do. Personal preference.
In order to make foods "zero calories" lot of companies decrease the serving size. Anything labeled zero calories can contain as much as 5 calories per serving. So they reduce serving size till its under 5 calories then smack zero calorie label on it. So this contains 181 servings which could be potentially 181 * 5 calories (905 calories). It contains brown sugar, so it DEFINITLY is not zero calories.
Unless you plan on using half the bottle on a chicken breast, or unless you happen to be a lab rat which is about to be injected with 50cc's of it, I would say you are fine to not worry about it. Or, alternatively, there is an entire aisle at the grocery store for you to shop for an alternative.
0 -
You'd have to eat the whole container of spice to make it "post" worthy. 100g (the entire Ms. Dash bottle) of basil is only 22 calories. Brown sugar is NOT a spice. It's a sugar. If you are talking sugar, count every serving size. If you are talking SPICE, most are listed as 0-1 calorie per serving. Basil is 1c per serving. Zesty lemon seasoning says 0c per 1/4tsp. 120 servings. (That equals 60 tsp per bottle). A lemon peel makes 1tsp of zest and is 1calorie. So if 1tsp of zesty lemon is 1c, then 60 tsp's is 60calories. Who uses an entire bottle though! Most you will add is a few tsp's. No sense in logging 2calories.3
-
JustRobby1 wrote: »Zero calories like the label you supplied shows means zero calories. I am not sure where you are getting 690 calories from. Almost none of the seasonings I personally use regularly contain calories either, so I do not bother logging them. I generally don't bother logging anything that does not contain calories (diet coke, is another example), but I know some people who do. Personal preference.
When I'm using the recipe builder, I put everything in, including seasonings, water, etc. The only things I leave out are "salt and pepper 'to taste'" (and if I had a medical reason to watch my sodium, I'd count that too). But if I'm just tossing some julienned potatoes in a Ziploc with various spices to make 'oven fries', I don't bother to track the seasonings.0 -
Yes, ingredients are listed in descending order by weight. At maximum, there would be 130 calories from the sugar in the entire bottle. 1/4 of the bottle would put you around 32 calories maximum with negligible additions from the previous ingredients.2
-
But how much is actually sticking to the chicken? I use a lot of different marinades that obviously have calories...but very little actually sticks to the meat I'm cooking...never tracked it...negligible.
If you're mopping it up as a sauce, then that's another story...in that case you'd want to measure it out and assume 5 calories per measured serving used to sauce the chicken. It's still probably not that much...0 -
So log a quarter of the entire container?0 -
Yes, ingredients are listed in descending order by weight. At maximum, there would be 130 calories from the sugar in the entire bottle. 1/4 of the bottle would put you around 32 calories maximum with negligible additions from the previous ingredients.
I'm taking this way too serious lol. it's got 95mg of sodium per serving. From wikipedia, salt is roughly 40% sodium, and 60% chloride. This means there is 43 grams of salt in the bottle.
181 - 43 = 138g other stuff. If we assume equal proportions for next 5 ingredients, that gives 138 / 5 = AT MOST 27.6g of brown sugar in the bottle. So at 3.8 calories per gram of brown sugar, AT MOST 105 calories as brown sugar lol.0 -
There are 181 servings in that container. Worst case, it contains 90 calories for the entire thing (calories per serving is below 0.5 calories or else it would be rounded to 1).0
-
I log spices as part of recipes but don't often use premade seasoning mixes so I know how much of each ingredient I am putting in.
Maybe you could make your own seasoning mix and leave out the sugar to reduce calories or start using less.
1 -
Yes, ingredients are listed in descending order by weight. At maximum, there would be 130 calories from the sugar in the entire bottle. 1/4 of the bottle would put you around 32 calories maximum with negligible additions from the previous ingredients.
I'm taking this way too serious lol. it's got 95mg of sodium per serving. From wikipedia, salt is roughly 40% sodium, and 60% chloride. This means there is 43 grams of salt in the bottle.
181 - 43 = 138g other stuff. If we assume equal proportions for next 5 ingredients, that gives 138 / 5 = AT MOST 27.6g of brown sugar in the bottle. So at 3.8 calories per gram of brown sugar, AT MOST 105 calories as brown sugar lol.
You are way overthinking this whole thing.
Herbs and spices I do not count. Seasonings (because of the salt, sugar, and other ingredients) I count 10-20 calories per teaspoon and I DO measure.
Also, why are you trying to calculate salt? The sodium number is what you need to be aware of, if you watch sodium. If you don't, who cares?0 -
Yes, ingredients are listed in descending order by weight. At maximum, there would be 130 calories from the sugar in the entire bottle. 1/4 of the bottle would put you around 32 calories maximum with negligible additions from the previous ingredients.
I'm taking this way too serious lol. it's got 95mg of sodium per serving. From wikipedia, salt is roughly 40% sodium, and 60% chloride. This means there is 43 grams of salt in the bottle.
181 - 43 = 138g other stuff. If we assume equal proportions for next 5 ingredients, that gives 138 / 5 = AT MOST 27.6g of brown sugar in the bottle. So at 3.8 calories per gram of brown sugar, AT MOST 105 calories as brown sugar lol.
Why is this an issue? It doesn't sound like you're counting macros so why are you so concerned about the individual components? The label tells you how many calories are in the blend as a whole, regardless of where the calories are coming from.
Unless troll, in which case nice job!0 -
I don't understand why this is a thread, i kind of understand the concern, but if the bottle says zero calories then it is zero, its not worth worrying over. What worries me is the obsession with thinking the .5(exaggerating) calories this bottle might possibly afford you is that concerning to you. Its unhealthy to obsess over such numbers.0
-
I don't understand why this is a thread, i kind of understand the concern, but if the bottle says zero calories then it is zero, its not worth worrying over. What worries me is the obsession with thinking the .5(exaggerating) calories this bottle might possibly afford you is that concerning to you. Its unhealthy to obsess over such numbers.
Sometimes it is worth considering 0 calorie items. If you're eating more than the serving size, many turn out not to be 0 calories at all. Good examples are spray oil/butter.
I'm not saying this is in that category, but for people who are consuming multiple servings of some 0 calorie products, it can be worth thinking about.0 -
Unfortunately, in the US, companies are not required to list the calories for the whole package and generally don't.Why is this an issue? It doesn't sound like you're counting macros so why are you so concerned about the individual components? The label tells you how many calories are in the blend as a whole, regardless of where the calories are coming from.
As a poster stated above, companies can (and have) manipulated the serving size so that they can get below 5 calories so that they can claim a product is zero calories through rounding.I don't understand why this is a thread, i kind of understand the concern, but if the bottle says zero calories then it is zero, its not worth worrying over. What worries me is the obsession with thinking the .5(exaggerating) calories this bottle might possibly afford you is that concerning to you. Its unhealthy to obsess over such numbers.
It's not a problem with spices so much as things like cooking spray. That says zero calories and zero fat on the can even though the spray is 100% fat and so it is 9 calories per gram. A 1/4th of a second spray is under 5 calories but a 4 second spray certainly isn't. There was a poster a while back who said she was going through a can something like every day or two. That definitely added up to quite a few calories.1 -
Unfortunately, in the US, companies are not required to list the calories for the whole package and generally don't.Why is this an issue? It doesn't sound like you're counting macros so why are you so concerned about the individual components? The label tells you how many calories are in the blend as a whole, regardless of where the calories are coming from.
But it's not rocket science. US labels tell you how many servings are in a container. With a food labeled as zero calories per serving, worst case there are less than 0.5 calories per serving (otherwise it would be rounded up to 1 calorie per serving). Worst case in that entire container there are 90 calories (181 servings times 0.499999 calories per serving).
Because OP doesn't sound concerned about macros, where the calories are coming from doesn't make a difference and unless he/she is using/consuming half the container on a piece of chicken, the amount of calories provided by the seasoning is negligible.0 -
It's pseudo-rounding. Anything below 5 can be listed as zero.
Unfortunately, in the US, companies are not required to list the calories for the whole package and generally don't.Why is this an issue? It doesn't sound like you're counting macros so why are you so concerned about the individual components? The label tells you how many calories are in the blend as a whole, regardless of where the calories are coming from.
But it's not rocket science. US labels tell you how many servings are in a container. With a food labeled as zero calories per serving, worst case there are less than 0.5 calories per serving (otherwise it would be rounded up to 1 calorie per serving). Worst case in that entire container there are 90 calories (181 servings times 0.499999 calories per serving).
Using your example, 181 servings times 4.99999 would yield 904 calories in the entire container. That might start edging toward significant depending upon your deficit and how much you use.
I don't bother with counting the calories of herbs and spices or even things like dried onions. I do weigh and count things like iceberg lettuce because it's not very inconvenient for me.0 -
It's pseudo-rounding. Anything below 5 can be listed as zero.
Unfortunately, in the US, companies are not required to list the calories for the whole package and generally don't.Why is this an issue? It doesn't sound like you're counting macros so why are you so concerned about the individual components? The label tells you how many calories are in the blend as a whole, regardless of where the calories are coming from.
But it's not rocket science. US labels tell you how many servings are in a container. With a food labeled as zero calories per serving, worst case there are less than 0.5 calories per serving (otherwise it would be rounded up to 1 calorie per serving). Worst case in that entire container there are 90 calories (181 servings times 0.499999 calories per serving).
Using your example, 181 servings times 4.99999 would yield 904 calories in the entire container. That might start edging toward significant depending upon your deficit and how much you use.
I don't bother with counting the calories of herbs and spices or even things like dried onions. I do weigh and count things like iceberg lettuce because it's not very inconvenient for me.
Well I'll be damned. That's some generous rounding.0 -
It's pseudo-rounding. Anything below 5 can be listed as zero.
Unfortunately, in the US, companies are not required to list the calories for the whole package and generally don't.Why is this an issue? It doesn't sound like you're counting macros so why are you so concerned about the individual components? The label tells you how many calories are in the blend as a whole, regardless of where the calories are coming from.
But it's not rocket science. US labels tell you how many servings are in a container. With a food labeled as zero calories per serving, worst case there are less than 0.5 calories per serving (otherwise it would be rounded up to 1 calorie per serving). Worst case in that entire container there are 90 calories (181 servings times 0.499999 calories per serving).
Using your example, 181 servings times 4.99999 would yield 904 calories in the entire container. That might start edging toward significant depending upon your deficit and how much you use.
I don't bother with counting the calories of herbs and spices or even things like dried onions. I do weigh and count things like iceberg lettuce because it's not very inconvenient for me.
Well I'll be damned. That's some generous rounding.
Exactly. And if someone is using 1/4 of a container in a recipe, that's quite a bit more calories. Especially if you have a very small deficit.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions