Why does Basmati rice have so many calories?

dave_in_ni wrote: »

Fatty_Nuff wrote: »

Don't know where you got the calorie content for your brown basmati, but it is dead wrong. The white looks correct though. There is very little difference in the calorie content of brown vs white rice, be it Jasmine, Basmati, long grain, etc.

It can't be wrong, I've been eating various brands of brown rice almost daily for 3 years, I take 50g always under 100cals

Here is a similar brand in brown basmati 60 grams dry =211 calories
https://bit.ly/2RWXhKN

Yes, it can be annoying, which is why I tried to lighten it up. Basically, the reason is: manufacturers suck sometimes. Always make sure to read the label carefully for things that need to be cooked, you may discover some other items you've been undercounting. Personally, I have not seen any rice that had the info for cooked, it's always for dry. I have to use official databases when I want to weigh cooked rice. So, it's your manufacturer, not rice in general. Same goes for some types of pasta, I remember someone mention labels for cooked pasta which is odd and I have never seen it in person.

dave_in_ni wrote: »

I think I'll go back to potatoes, I only ate rice as I thought it was low cal, are potatoes measured cooked or uncooked

Potatoes are not that far from rice in calories if we're talking cooked, no fat. They're only like 30 or so calories lower or less per 100 grams cooked. When you feel like eating potatoes, eat potatoes, when you feel like eating rice, eat rice. 30 or 40 calories shouldn't be what decides what you eat.

As for logging, when you log any food on the planet, if you're weighing it uncooked, log it as uncooked. If you're weighing it cooked, log it as cooked. Find the corresponding database entry to the state of your food (cooked/uncooked). Personally, I like weighing everything raw when possible.

ETA to add an example:
If I weigh my potatoes after baking, this is the entry I would use



If I weigh them before baking, this is the entry I would use


The difference for potatoes is not that large, but it's good practice to do this for all foods because for some foods the difference is huge.

Check all your foods in something like the USDA Nutrient Database or Canadian Nutrient File (websites free online) whenever possible. It's the easiest way to be sure that you are logging the right nutrition info.

dave_in_ni wrote: »

Ok this is a head *kitten* now. Here is a screen shot old Vs new https://imgur.com/a/IYLO7RJ I scanned from bar code

Not sure in this case, but what sometimes trips people up is thinking that scanning from barcode is more accurate, calorie-wise. Unfortunately, it isn't.

Bar code is still just pulling up user-entered data from MFP's crowd-sourced database, so we still have to check carefully on first use. Once we've got a checked entry in recent/frequent foods, use it from there rather than scanning.