trouble finding the right entries

Options
Am I the only one who struggles finding the exact entries for unpackaged fruits, veggies and nuts? Finding the entries that give nutritional info per 100g instead of volume is hard enough already, but finding the correct entries for things that have pits, shells, or are usually eaten without skin is really challenging.

Most of the entries I seem to find either do not specify if it should be weighed with or without skin/pit/shell/pod or when it specified the nutritional info is per volume rather than per weight or if it's per weight it appears the same as for pitted/pealed as in unpitted/with skin, which doesn't make any sense.

I think I have found the correct "flesh-only entries" for avocados and bananas, but I am still unsure about cherries, plums, apricots, pistachios and edamame beans.

Am I the only one? Do other people just not care if you weigh your food pitted/unpitted etc. and assume the difference is minor or am I the only one who struggles finding the correct entries?

I mean, with fruits, the difference probably isn't huge, but say, pistachios reduce almost twice in weight after removing the shells, which means the calories should be twice as low, which makes a huge difference with such a calorie dense food. But even after I tried searching online with specifying shelled/unshelled the info I found per 100 g was all between 570-620 cals for either, which doesn't make any sense?

Replies

  • kommodevaran
    kommodevaran Posts: 17,890 Member
    Options
    You may have to check with the usda database.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    You don't need the entry to specify. When you're logging by weight, you always log what you're eating, not anything you're throwing away.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,012 Member
    Options
    Internet search for USDA published info and see how they word their descriptions, then use those terms to find the USDA values in the mfp database. Usually if I use the words Peeled, Pitted, Raw, that sort of thing the USDA entry will come up. Once you find the right entry, it's in your recent list and you can just pull it out of there.
  • collectingblues
    collectingblues Posts: 2,541 Member
    Options
    I use USDA for everything -- when you search USDA, the item number will then pop up. Then use the item number to search on MFP.

    For cherries, I did a before and after weight. I found that the stems and pits were 6 percent of the total weight. So now I weigh, multiple the grams by .94, and enter *that* gram total in MFP.
  • AliceDark
    AliceDark Posts: 3,886 Member
    Options
    I assume that weight-by-grams is for the edible portion only, and I always add "raw USDA" when I search for fruits/vegetables. When I'm prepping food at home and can, I'll slice stone fruit to remove the pit and weigh the edible portion, but if I'm prepping food to take with me to work and don't want to do that, I'll just weight the whole fruit and take 2-4g off of the total weight to account for the pit.
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,147 Member
    Options
    I use USDA for everything -- when you search USDA, the item number will then pop up. Then use the item number to search on MFP.

    For cherries, I did a before and after weight. I found that the stems and pits were 6 percent of the total weight. So now I weigh, multiple the grams by .94, and enter *that* gram total in MFP.

    Wow, now that's hardcore. :lol: Kudos to you!

    I figure I make a lot of mistakes every day, some too high, some too low. Sometimes I forget to log something. Sometimes I log full fat dairy accidentally when I had 1%. Meh. Even if I make errors in the range of 10% that's still less than 200 calories.

    200 calories is close enough. My daily intake is very rarely right exactly on the money. I have no problem holding my weight with, "close enough is good enough."
  • oat_bran
    oat_bran Posts: 370 Member
    Options
    You don't need the entry to specify. When you're logging by weight, you always log what you're eating, not anything you're throwing away.

    I think you have misunderstood my question.
    Gisel2015 wrote: »
    I don't weigh cherries pits; I just enter how many cherries I ate, that's all. Don't sweat the small.

    Cherries and other fruit vary significantly by size. Depending on how many you eat the difference can be significant.
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Internet search for USDA published info and see how they word their descriptions, then use those terms to find the USDA values in the mfp database. Usually if I use the words Peeled, Pitted, Raw, that sort of thing the USDA entry will come up. Once you find the right entry, it's in your recent list and you can just pull it out of there.

    Yeah, I think that's what I'll try to do. I forgot about the USDA. Though some things are still unspecified there. Pistachios, for example. It just says dry, roasted, unsalted. I assume they mean without shells, but I'm still unsure.
    AliceDark wrote: »
    I assume that weight-by-grams is for the edible portion only, and I always add "raw USDA" when I search for fruits/vegetables. When I'm prepping food at home and can, I'll slice stone fruit to remove the pit and weigh the edible portion, but if I'm prepping food to take with me to work and don't want to do that, I'll just weight the whole fruit and take 2-4g off of the total weight to account for the pit.
    AliceDark wrote: »
    I assume that weight-by-grams is for the edible portion only, and I always add "raw USDA" when I search for fruits/vegetables. When I'm prepping food at home and can, I'll slice stone fruit to remove the pit and weigh the edible portion, but if I'm prepping food to take with me to work and don't want to do that, I'll just weight the whole fruit and take 2-4g off of the total weight to account for the pit.

    I've been doing pretty much the same with apricots, plums and peaches. Assuming that the entry includes the pit and just guessing the pit weight.
    AliceDark wrote: »
    I assume that weight-by-grams is for the edible portion only, and I always add "raw USDA" when I search for fruits/vegetables. When I'm prepping food at home and can, I'll slice stone fruit to remove the pit and weigh the edible portion, but if I'm prepping food to take with me to work and don't want to do that, I'll just weight the whole fruit and take 2-4g off of the total weight to account for the pit.

    Would be cool if it always meant edible portion only, but I wouldn't be so sure. I don't think USDA just assumes people remove the pits or skins from bananas and peaches before weighing them but maybe?
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,028 Member
    Options
    For all you peeps searching for USDA or the USDA # in the MFP database - those are all user-created entries. MFP has added most of the USDA database. I call these System-created entries. (One weird exception is eggs. For that I do look for the USDA #.)

    Unfortunately, the green check marks are used for both user-created entries and system entries. To find system entries for whole foods, I get the syntax from the USDA database and plug that into MFP.

    For packaged foods, I verify the label against what I find in MFP.
  • AliceDark
    AliceDark Posts: 3,886 Member
    Options
    oat_bran wrote: »
    Would be cool if it always meant edible portion only, but I wouldn't be so sure. I don't think USDA just assumes people remove the pits or skins from bananas and peaches before weighing them but maybe?
    USDA nutrition information is for edible portions of food only, so if the USDA entry says that 100g of banana has X calories, it's for the fruit (not the peel).

  • Gisel2015
    Gisel2015 Posts: 4,154 Member
    Options
    @oat_bran
    The cherries that I eat are mostly the same size; no big or "significant" difference to worry about. For me logging per unit is sufficient.

    For the other fruits, I just cut them up and weigh what I am eating before logging. I always used the USDA entries, and if those entries are with or without skin, or with or without pits, it has not made a difference for me or the weight that I have been maintaining for 8 years. I do not struggle or lose sleep trying to find the "exact" entries because I am not looking for perfection.



  • oat_bran
    oat_bran Posts: 370 Member
    edited August 2018
    Options
    oat_bran wrote: »
    You don't need the entry to specify. When you're logging by weight, you always log what you're eating, not anything you're throwing away.

    I think you have misunderstood my question.
    Gisel2015 wrote: »
    I don't weigh cherries pits; I just enter how many cherries I ate, that's all. Don't sweat the small.

    Cherries and other fruit vary significantly by size. Depending on how many you eat the difference can be significant.
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Internet search for USDA published info and see how they word their descriptions, then use those terms to find the USDA values in the mfp database. Usually if I use the words Peeled, Pitted, Raw, that sort of thing the USDA entry will come up. Once you find the right entry, it's in your recent list and you can just pull it out of there.

    Yeah, I think that's what I'll try to do. I forgot about the USDA. Though some things are still unspecified there. Pistachios, for example. It just says dry, roasted, unsalted. I assume they mean without shells, but I'm still unsure.
    AliceDark wrote: »
    I assume that weight-by-grams is for the edible portion only, and I always add "raw USDA" when I search for fruits/vegetables. When I'm prepping food at home and can, I'll slice stone fruit to remove the pit and weigh the edible portion, but if I'm prepping food to take with me to work and don't want to do that, I'll just weight the whole fruit and take 2-4g off of the total weight to account for the pit.
    AliceDark wrote: »
    I assume that weight-by-grams is for the edible portion only, and I always add "raw USDA" when I search for fruits/vegetables. When I'm prepping food at home and can, I'll slice stone fruit to remove the pit and weigh the edible portion, but if I'm prepping food to take with me to work and don't want to do that, I'll just weight the whole fruit and take 2-4g off of the total weight to account for the pit.

    I've been doing pretty much the same with apricots, plums and peaches. Assuming that the entry includes the pit and just guessing the pit weight.
    AliceDark wrote: »
    I assume that weight-by-grams is for the edible portion only, and I always add "raw USDA" when I search for fruits/vegetables. When I'm prepping food at home and can, I'll slice stone fruit to remove the pit and weigh the edible portion, but if I'm prepping food to take with me to work and don't want to do that, I'll just weight the whole fruit and take 2-4g off of the total weight to account for the pit.

    Would be cool if it always meant edible portion only, but I wouldn't be so sure. I don't think USDA just assumes people remove the pits or skins from bananas and peaches before weighing them but maybe?

    I don't think I'm misunderstanding the question. When you're logging foods like peaches or pistachios or bananas by weight, you log the flesh -- what you're actually eating. You don't need to find specific entries for peach flesh or pistachio flesh or banana flesh. The USDA entry isn't assuming you're eating the peel or husk.

    I see. In this case, your formulation was confusing to me. If you said, "the entries you find for fruits and veggies that have parts that are usually discarded that don't specify whether the item should be weighed with this parts or not show nutritional value only for the edible part", then I would understand what you meant. However, I simply can't be sure that this is true. As a user above has pointed out, because I 'log' using the entries that I find in the database created by other users. The caloric value of peeled, shelled, pitted etc. fruits and veggies differs from that of unpeeled, unshelled and upitted fruits and veggies by WEIGHT. "Flesh-only" usually higher in calories than 'with skin'. There are entries, in particular based on USDA data and nutritiondata.com that specify whether fruits and veggies should be peeled, pitted etc. when weighed. But many do not. As a couple of users above have pointed out, for the USDA entries at least what, the data is based on the edible portion only, which I didn't know. But I am sure that are many users on here who do not realize this and weight their bananas, peaches, cherries and pistachios whole and don't subtract the peel or pit weight.
  • oat_bran
    oat_bran Posts: 370 Member
    edited August 2018
    Options
    Gisel2015 wrote: »
    @oat_bran
    The cherries that I eat are mostly the same size; no big or "significant" difference to worry about. For me logging per unit is sufficient.

    Ok, but how do you know that the size of particular cherries that you eat corresponds to the size of cherries in the entry created by someone else?

    Maybe I'm overthinking here but MFP is full of posts that says "weigh everything, don't "guestimate" anything, count every lick or don't be surprised if you're not losing weight."

    I don't have much to lose so my daily deficit is quite small and those kind of liberties by rounding up and guessing things can throw me off track significantly.




  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    oat_bran wrote: »
    oat_bran wrote: »
    You don't need the entry to specify. When you're logging by weight, you always log what you're eating, not anything you're throwing away.

    I think you have misunderstood my question.
    Gisel2015 wrote: »
    I don't weigh cherries pits; I just enter how many cherries I ate, that's all. Don't sweat the small.

    Cherries and other fruit vary significantly by size. Depending on how many you eat the difference can be significant.
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Internet search for USDA published info and see how they word their descriptions, then use those terms to find the USDA values in the mfp database. Usually if I use the words Peeled, Pitted, Raw, that sort of thing the USDA entry will come up. Once you find the right entry, it's in your recent list and you can just pull it out of there.

    Yeah, I think that's what I'll try to do. I forgot about the USDA. Though some things are still unspecified there. Pistachios, for example. It just says dry, roasted, unsalted. I assume they mean without shells, but I'm still unsure.
    AliceDark wrote: »
    I assume that weight-by-grams is for the edible portion only, and I always add "raw USDA" when I search for fruits/vegetables. When I'm prepping food at home and can, I'll slice stone fruit to remove the pit and weigh the edible portion, but if I'm prepping food to take with me to work and don't want to do that, I'll just weight the whole fruit and take 2-4g off of the total weight to account for the pit.
    AliceDark wrote: »
    I assume that weight-by-grams is for the edible portion only, and I always add "raw USDA" when I search for fruits/vegetables. When I'm prepping food at home and can, I'll slice stone fruit to remove the pit and weigh the edible portion, but if I'm prepping food to take with me to work and don't want to do that, I'll just weight the whole fruit and take 2-4g off of the total weight to account for the pit.

    I've been doing pretty much the same with apricots, plums and peaches. Assuming that the entry includes the pit and just guessing the pit weight.
    AliceDark wrote: »
    I assume that weight-by-grams is for the edible portion only, and I always add "raw USDA" when I search for fruits/vegetables. When I'm prepping food at home and can, I'll slice stone fruit to remove the pit and weigh the edible portion, but if I'm prepping food to take with me to work and don't want to do that, I'll just weight the whole fruit and take 2-4g off of the total weight to account for the pit.

    Would be cool if it always meant edible portion only, but I wouldn't be so sure. I don't think USDA just assumes people remove the pits or skins from bananas and peaches before weighing them but maybe?

    I don't think I'm misunderstanding the question. When you're logging foods like peaches or pistachios or bananas by weight, you log the flesh -- what you're actually eating. You don't need to find specific entries for peach flesh or pistachio flesh or banana flesh. The USDA entry isn't assuming you're eating the peel or husk.

    I see. In this case, your formulation was confusing to me. If you said, "the entries you find for fruits and veggies that have parts that are usually discarded that don't specify whether the item should be weighed with this parts or not show nutritional value only for the edible part", then I would understand what you meant. However, I simply can't be sure that this is true. As a user above has pointed out, because I 'log' using the entries that I find in the database created by other users. The caloric value of peeled, shelled, pitted etc. fruits and veggies differs from that of unpeeled, unshelled and upitted fruits and veggies by WEIGHT. "Flesh-only" usually higher in calories than 'with skin'. There are entries, in particular based on USDA data and nutritiondata.com that specify whether fruits and veggies should be peeled, pitted etc. when weighed. But many do not. As a couple of users above have pointed out, for the USDA entries at least what, the data is based on the edible portion only, which I didn't know. But I am sure that are many users on here who do not realize this and weight their bananas, peaches, cherries and pistachios whole and don't subtract the peel or pit weight.

    I see the confusion. Yes, I only log using USDA entries. Since those assume only the edible part is being consumed, I only log what I eat. Sorry for not being clear.
  • Gisel2015
    Gisel2015 Posts: 4,154 Member
    Options
    oat_bran wrote: »
    Gisel2015 wrote: »
    @oat_bran
    The cherries that I eat are mostly the same size; no big or "significant" difference to worry about. For me logging per unit is sufficient.

    Ok, but how do you know that the size of particular cherries that you eat corresponds to the size of cherries in the entry created by someone else?

    Maybe I'm overthinking here but MFP is full of posts that says "weigh everything, don't "guestimate" anything, count every lick or don't be surprised if you're not losing weight."

    I don't have much to lose so my daily deficit is quite small and those kind of liberties by rounding up and guessing things can throw me off track significantly.




    You are correct, I don't know if the size of the cherries that I ate corresponds to what ever is in the MFP database; however, and as I said before, the difference (if any) has not made a dent in my weight, so that difference is not important to me.

    You are also correct when you said that you are overthinking and in my opinion, going for too much perfection. Take what ever is posted in the forums with a grain of salt because we are all different. I didn't get a food scale until I was in maintenance and I only had 10 to 12 lbs to lose. My deficit was also small but my approach worked for me. Weigh and log your food as accurate as you can without being OCD or you may lose your weight and your mind too :'( .
  • bjess8411
    bjess8411 Posts: 68 Member
    Options
    oat_bran wrote: »
    Am I the only one who struggles finding the exact entries for unpackaged fruits, veggies and nuts? Finding the entries that give nutritional info per 100g instead of volume is hard enough already, but finding the correct entries for things that have pits, shells, or are usually eaten without skin is really challenging.

    Most of the entries I seem to find either do not specify if it should be weighed with or without skin/pit/shell/pod or when it specified the nutritional info is per volume rather than per weight or if it's per weight it appears the same as for pitted/pealed as in unpitted/with skin, which doesn't make any sense.

    I think I have found the correct "flesh-only entries" for avocados and bananas, but I am still unsure about cherries, plums, apricots, pistachios and edamame beans.

    Am I the only one? Do other people just not care if you weigh your food pitted/unpitted etc. and assume the difference is minor or am I the only one who struggles finding the correct entries?

    I mean, with fruits, the difference probably isn't huge, but say, pistachios reduce almost twice in weight after removing the shells, which means the calories should be twice as low, which makes a huge difference with such a calorie dense food. But even after I tried searching online with specifying shelled/unshelled the info I found per 100 g was all between 570-620 cals for either, which doesn't make any sense?

    I did too. I switched to mynetdiary because it was so much simpler.