Measuring Salmon

Options
Panini911
Panini911 Posts: 2,325 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
Possibly a silly question...

So from what I have read, it is better to weigh raw. However, the salmon has skin on it. I rather cook with the skin VS try to get it off. But then I am stuck weighing the salmon cooked. or trying to guess what the skin weight? Or does salmon skin not weigh much?

Ideas? Tips?
«1

Replies

  • Nativestar56
    Nativestar56 Posts: 112 Member
    Options
    I also weigh raw and don't worry about it. The number of calories wasted isn't going to be in the hundreds anyway I'm ok with a little a bit of inaccuracy for simplicities sake, especially when its not going to put me over in any way.
  • collectingblues
    collectingblues Posts: 2,541 Member
    Options
    I weigh raw. I figure there's not enough stuff in the skin to make a noticeable difference, so I just consider it a buffer.
  • Florida_Superstar
    Florida_Superstar Posts: 194 Member
    Options
    Weighing raw is recommended, but I don't and have maintained my weight for years. I think it doesn't change calories enough to matter. I just had salmon tonight and weighed it cooked after removing skin.
  • Panini911
    Panini911 Posts: 2,325 Member
    edited August 2018
    Options
    Maybe i just never really realized how high calorie salmon is. i prefer keeping my protein at dinner to 150cals or so but salmon ends up being too small a portion at that range. I was hoping the skin weighed more :P

    so I just took the calorie "expenditure" and made three (large) portion out of my 550gram (uncooked) piece VS four too small pieces. It sorta works out to 3.5 portions but i know a .5 portion of salmon will just end up going in the garbage which is a waste of good fish. No snacks tonight ;)

    ETA: ok I know what I need to do, figure out the gram i want and then buy the portion that best fits that so I don't end up with random "half a meal" or "too small portions"!
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,900 Member
    Options
    Panini911 wrote: »
    Maybe i just never really realized how high calorie salmon is. i prefer keeping my protein at dinner to 150cals or so but salmon ends up being too small a portion at that range. I was hoping the skin weighed more :P

    so I just took the calorie "expenditure" and made three (large) portion out of my 550gram (uncooked) piece VS four too small pieces. It sorta works out to 3.5 portions but i know a .5 portion of salmon will just end up going in the garbage which is a waste of good fish. No snacks tonight ;)

    ETA: ok I know what I need to do, figure out the gram i want and then buy the portion that best fits that so I don't end up with random "half a meal" or "too small portions"!

    When I have leftover meat in too small a quantity for a meal I'll add it to eggs or salad or make a sandwich out of it.

    I don't consider salmon high calorie - what entry are you using?
  • motivatedmartha
    motivatedmartha Posts: 1,108 Member
    Options
    I just weight it raw, cook it and eat it - if I don't eat the skin I'm quids in - if I do (depends on how crispy it is) I'm no worse off.
  • Panini911
    Panini911 Posts: 2,325 Member
    Options
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Panini911 wrote: »
    Maybe i just never really realized how high calorie salmon is. i prefer keeping my protein at dinner to 150cals or so but salmon ends up being too small a portion at that range. I was hoping the skin weighed more :P

    so I just took the calorie "expenditure" and made three (large) portion out of my 550gram (uncooked) piece VS four too small pieces. It sorta works out to 3.5 portions but i know a .5 portion of salmon will just end up going in the garbage which is a waste of good fish. No snacks tonight ;)

    ETA: ok I know what I need to do, figure out the gram i want and then buy the portion that best fits that so I don't end up with random "half a meal" or "too small portions"!

    When I have leftover meat in too small a quantity for a meal I'll add it to eggs or salad or make a sandwich out of it.

    I don't consider salmon high calorie - what entry are you using?

    I think it's a portion issue. i find a 4 oz portion to be pretty small. So I need to not use my eyes when portioning out salmon ;)
  • missysippy930
    missysippy930 Posts: 2,577 Member
    Options
    Why so concerned about the minimal weight of salmon skin? Some things are not worth fussing over. Are you concerned about the accuracy of your scale?
  • Tedebearduff
    Tedebearduff Posts: 1,155 Member
    Options
    I weigh my stuff cooked, allot of crazy tactics above to me. Don't over complicate stuff, choose a method and just stick with it and you'll be fine. To me the cooked weight is the weight that I am consuming, all the water is out of it and the nutrient level would be that weight, not it's raw weight. (to me)

    Best of luck in your journey.
  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    Options
    Tedebearduff wrote: »
    I weigh my stuff cooked, allot of crazy tactics above to me. Don't over complicate stuff, choose a method and just stick with it and you'll be fine. To me the cooked weight is the weight that I am consuming, all the water is out of it and the nutrient level would be that weight, not it's raw weight. (to me)

    Best of luck in your journey.

    The issue with weighing raw versus cooked is that if a lot of water is cooked out, then the cooked meat weighs less but has the same number of calories. So 4 oz of cooked meat has more calories than 4 oz raw, because you might need 5 oz raw to make 4 oz cooked (example; not sure what water content is usually lost). I would worry about that inaccuracy a whole lot more than the issue with skin.

    Having said that, I do often weigh chicken cooked using entries for that. Water content in raw varies tremendously. In salmon, not so much.
  • Tedebearduff
    Tedebearduff Posts: 1,155 Member
    Options
    CarvedTones wrote: »
    Tedebearduff wrote: »
    I weigh my stuff cooked, allot of crazy tactics above to me. Don't over complicate stuff, choose a method and just stick with it and you'll be fine. To me the cooked weight is the weight that I am consuming, all the water is out of it and the nutrient level would be that weight, not it's raw weight. (to me)

    Best of luck in your journey.

    The issue with weighing raw versus cooked is that if a lot of water is cooked out, then the cooked meat weighs less but has the same number of calories. So 4 oz of cooked meat has more calories than 4 oz raw, because you might need 5 oz raw to make 4 oz cooked (example; not sure what water content is usually lost). I would worry about that inaccuracy a whole lot more than the issue with skin.

    Having said that, I do often weigh chicken cooked using entries for that. Water content in raw varies tremendously. In salmon, not so much.

    If you're cooking out water, how many calories are in the water again? Just saying is all.... you're losing out on the water and some of the fat content , so that is why I would weigh it cooked.

    If you want to weigh it raw, just stick with that, just choose 1 method is all and stick with it. Don't worry about reweighing it without the skin and over analyze it is all I'm getting at. Both methods would work if s/he stuck to one of them and didn't over think it.
  • Panini911
    Panini911 Posts: 2,325 Member
    Options
    Thanks guys.

    I think part of the issue is I have been under-logging protein. So my idea of what a "portion" is was greatly exaggerated. I've had a similar realization with chicken. Because I was exercising a ton and not eating exercise calories it didn't impact my weight loss (the one bonus of not eating back exercise calories - it makes logging errors very forgivable!). But with learning to eat appropriately (appropriate portions are my biggest issue) I want to start logging accurately (and will likely be able to "add" more daily calories as I do if I was consistently underlogging).
  • callsitlikeiseeit
    callsitlikeiseeit Posts: 8,627 Member
    Options
    CarvedTones wrote: »
    I weigh it raw, throw away the skin after I eat it and don't worry about it. It's not like I have salmon all that often. I get more concerned about total accuracy in things I have a lot. Plus counting it as a few too many calories is not that much of a problem.

    im a lazy counter. thats how i do it too lol

    its just not enough to make a difference.
  • NovusDies
    NovusDies Posts: 8,940 Member
    Options
    Tedebearduff wrote: »
    If you're cooking out water, how many calories are in the water again? Just saying is all.... you're losing out on the water and some of the fat content , so that is why I would weigh it cooked.

    If you want to weigh it raw, just stick with that, just choose 1 method is all and stick with it. Don't worry about reweighing it without the skin and over analyze it is all I'm getting at. Both methods would work if s/he stuck to one of them and didn't over think it.


    You don't know how much water you have cooked out which increases your margin of error. Water has weight so as you cook something the water is released making the item lighter and lighter while the calories remain the same. How much this matters depends on how much of a calorie deficit you have to work with, how accurate you are with other things, and how satisfied you are with your daily calories. I am pretty satisfied I so err on the high side by inflating any numbers (especially from restaurants) that I don't trust. Depending on her TOM my wife can be a bit hangry and errs on the bargaining side of trying to fit more calories in her day (she also weighs cooked usually). She also doesn't lose at the rate she chose either.

Categories