We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!

More calories by weight?

Pageturner66
Pageturner66 Posts: 3 Member
edited November 2024 in Recipes
So, at a friend's advice, I weighed all the ingredients in my spaghetti and put them in by weight instead. THing is, this caused the calories to skyrocket (17,000 calories per serving?). I noticed that depending on whether I put in the info as grams or as items, it had a really major difference. My two sweet onions went from 212 calories to 14,000 calories depending on whether I put them in as two onions or as 446g of onion. Anyone have this happen?

Replies

  • RuNaRoUnDaFiEld
    RuNaRoUnDaFiEld Posts: 5,864 Member
    446G of onions is 178 kcal so the entry you have chosen isn't correct.
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »
    446G of onions is 178 kcal so the entry you have chosen isn't correct.

    446g of onion is also a LOT of onion!!!
  • Pageturner66
    Pageturner66 Posts: 3 Member
    *shrugs* It's just two medium sized onions. I chose 'sweet onion' because that's what it was at Hannaford.
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Pageturner66 wrote: »
    *shrugs* It's just two medium sized onions. I chose 'sweet onion' because that's what it was at Hannaford.

    and you eat all that in one sitting?
  • Pageturner66
    Pageturner66 Posts: 3 Member
    What? No, that recipe makes like 8 servings.
  • deannalfisher
    deannalfisher Posts: 5,600 Member
    sounds like a bad entry - did you use like USDA onion, sweet, diced (or similar)
  • lporter229
    lporter229 Posts: 4,907 Member
    I have found that some entries may be correct for a certain measurement, but when you choose a different option the conversion is incorrect causing the calories to skyrocket. For example, something might be 100 calories for an ounce, but if I choose 28g (which is the same thing), it goes to several thousand. You just have to pay attention when you are logging and choose a different entry if something doesn't make sense.
  • OldHobo
    OldHobo Posts: 647 Member
    Pageturner66 wrote: »
    So, at a friend's advice, I weighed all the ingredients in my spaghetti and put them in by weight instead. THing is, this caused the calories to skyrocket (17,000 calories per serving?). I noticed that depending on whether I put in the info as grams or as items, it had a really major difference. My two sweet onions went from 212 calories to 14,000 calories depending on whether I put them in as two onions or as 446g of onion. Anyone have this happen?

    Because every MFP member can input into the database there are some really crazy records. The longer you use it the less frustrating it becomes. When entering food I'm not used to I keep the USDA database open in a separate tab. Of course, it takes a little getting used to as well.
  • ritzvin
    ritzvin Posts: 2,862 Member
    Pageturner66 wrote: »
    So, at a friend's advice, I weighed all the ingredients in my spaghetti and put them in by weight instead. THing is, this caused the calories to skyrocket (17,000 calories per serving?). I noticed that depending on whether I put in the info as grams or as items, it had a really major difference. My two sweet onions went from 212 calories to 14,000 calories depending on whether I put them in as two onions or as 446g of onion. Anyone have this happen?

    The USDA vegetable entries are usually per 100g (not 1g)..double check you didn't accidentally enter 44,600g.
  • lorrpb
    lorrpb Posts: 11,463 Member
    There is something wrong with how you're weighing or logging the serving. Weighing often results in higher calories because measuring cups and items tend to underestimate, but not 200 vs 12,000!
This discussion has been closed.

Categories