Weighing your meat...

Options
Hey all, should I be weighing my meat raw? And if I cant weigh it raw... how should I log it?

I eat mostly chicken and I know it weighs a lot less after you cook it.
«1

Replies

  • NovusDies
    NovusDies Posts: 8,940 Member
    Options
    Weighing it raw will always be the most accurate (especially if you use accurate USDA entries). Different cooking methods will extract different levels of moisture from the meat. Using a slow cooker on a "set and forget" mindset will can substantially overcook the chicken and drop its weight even further.

    If you cannot weigh it raw you need to find the entry that best matches the cooking method and use the cooked weight. The margin of error will be higher but I have never found that the times I have had to use cooked weights to have any noticeable impact on my food diary. For me they are a minority though and I do work with a large calorie deficit.
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    Options
    NovusDies wrote: »
    Weighing it raw will always be the most accurate (especially if you use accurate USDA entries). Different cooking methods will extract different levels of moisture from the meat. Using a slow cooker on a "set and forget" mindset will can substantially overcook the chicken and drop its weight even further.

    If you cannot weigh it raw you need to find the entry that best matches the cooking method and use the cooked weight. The margin of error will be higher but I have never found that the times I have had to use cooked weights to have any noticeable impact on my food diary. For me they are a minority though and I do work with a large calorie deficit.

    ^this, especially if you want to double-check your entry against the nutrition label on the meat since the nutrition label is for the raw weight I'm unless it specifies otherwise. Bacon tends to be one of the notable exceptions.
  • lin_be
    lin_be Posts: 393 Member
    Options
    Weigh raw, log raw. Weigh cooked, log cooked. Raw > cooked
  • JaimeJaimeM
    JaimeJaimeM Posts: 63 Member
    Options
    Definitely always weigh raw.
  • earlnabby
    earlnabby Posts: 8,171 Member
    Options
    Another who always weighs raw. When you cook meat, you are cooking out both fat and water (skinless chicken is mostly going to be water, 80/20 ground beef is going to be mostly fat) and there is no way to know how much of either is cooking out. The only thing that is going to be affected is that you may be slightly overestimating the calories but logging isn't 100% precise so I look at it as banking a handful of calories for something else I may slightly underestimate.

    To address the second part of your question, if you can't weigh it raw, use your best guess as to what the cooking method was. If I can't see evidence of something like grilling, I usually use a "roasted" entry.

    When eating out and you can't weigh at all, ask the server to give you the weight of the meat. Most restaurants use vendors who provide meat already butchered to certain size portions and that info is easily found out. Often it is right in the description on the menu. These weights are always raw so your logging will be a raw entry.
  • KD0BIK
    KD0BIK Posts: 44 Member
    Options
    Really? Weigh raw? I never thought of that. I grill all my meats and figured the best was to weigh after cooked. After all, I don't eat raw meat.
  • JohnnytotheB
    JohnnytotheB Posts: 361 Member
    Options
    HAHAHAHA! That's actually kind of a funny statement!! Anywho, yes you should weigh it raw! I normally take what's right on the package (unless you buy in bulk and freeze, split or share).
  • deannalfisher
    deannalfisher Posts: 5,600 Member
    Options
    weight raw if at all possible; cooked is highly variable - depending on length of cooking time; cooking heat etc
  • NovusDies
    NovusDies Posts: 8,940 Member
    Options
    KD0BIK wrote: »
    Really? Weigh raw? I never thought of that. I grill all my meats and figured the best was to weigh after cooked. After all, I don't eat raw meat.

    I think if you are losing weight at the rate you want you don't need to change anything. If you slow down or stop you may need to consider where you can tighten up your logging.


  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,876 Member
    Options
    KD0BIK wrote: »
    Really? Weigh raw? I never thought of that. I grill all my meats and figured the best was to weigh after cooked. After all, I don't eat raw meat.

    If you weigh it cooked, you should use a "cooked" entry...otherwise nutritional information is typically raw or dry weight unless otherwise stated. If you weigh it after cooking it is going to weigh less than raw because you will lose water from the meat, but you don't lose calories. So something weighed cooked at 4 oz is actually more like 6 oz raw so you would be under reporting the calories.
  • KD0BIK
    KD0BIK Posts: 44 Member
    Options
    When I grill I usually grill for 2-3 meals. So I'll just have to stick to weighing cooked.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,876 Member
    Options
    KD0BIK wrote: »
    When I grill I usually grill for 2-3 meals. So I'll just have to stick to weighing cooked.

    Just used a "cooked" entry
  • NovusDies
    NovusDies Posts: 8,940 Member
    Options
    KD0BIK wrote: »
    When I grill I usually grill for 2-3 meals. So I'll just have to stick to weighing cooked.

    Not sure why that makes a difference. You can weigh it raw to get the exact number of calories and then weigh it cooked to determine portions and calories per portion.

    Not trying to talk you out of your current system though. Just mentioning it for anyone else reading.
  • MikePTY
    MikePTY Posts: 3,814 Member
    Options
    KD0BIK wrote: »
    Really? Weigh raw? I never thought of that. I grill all my meats and figured the best was to weigh after cooked. After all, I don't eat raw meat.

    The reason why raw is ideal is because depending on how you cook your meats, how long, the method, etc - you have various level of water loss. So 4 ounces of raw chicken may have a different cooked weight each time you cook it. That's why most people prefer to use raw.

    However weighing cooked is not the end of the world and will overall be pretty accurate. But raw is general preferred because of the various change in weight that accompanies cooking.
  • nocgirl72
    nocgirl72 Posts: 139 Member
    Options
    I find this confusing too. There are also various entries for cooked boneless skinless chicken breasts.

    For instance I just ate 1 oz Kirkland boneless chicken breast (the individually wrapped ones). I weighed it cooked, exactly 4 oz. Numerous entries showing 2 oz is 60 calories while one says 165 cals for 4 oz cooked. Google indicates 31 calories an ounce. Which entry is correct? Should I go with the 165 cals to be safe? It was a good size breast hard to believe it was only 120 calories so I guess I will go with the 165 cals
  • nocgirl72
    nocgirl72 Posts: 139 Member
    Options
    I ate 4 oz I meant
  • deannalfisher
    deannalfisher Posts: 5,600 Member
    Options
    KD0BIK wrote: »
    When I grill I usually grill for 2-3 meals. So I'll just have to stick to weighing cooked.

    or do what i do - which is make a recipe that is bulk chicken (or pick your protein) - then update it with raw weight and cooked product - then you can eat as much as you want (i.e. if i make 16oz of raw chicken and it ends up being 12oz cooked - i make my serving size 12 = 1oz each) - then i just weigh oout however much i want cooked
  • deannalfisher
    deannalfisher Posts: 5,600 Member
    Options
    nocgirl72 wrote: »
    I find this confusing too. There are also various entries for cooked boneless skinless chicken breasts.

    For instance I just ate 1 oz Kirkland boneless chicken breast (the individually wrapped ones). I weighed it cooked, exactly 4 oz. Numerous entries showing 2 oz is 60 calories while one says 165 cals for 4 oz cooked. Google indicates 31 calories an ounce. Which entry is correct? Should I go with the 165 cals to be safe? It was a good size breast hard to believe it was only 120 calories so I guess I will go with the 165 cals

    recommend searching USDA chicken breast raw boneless - for the best entries
  • wilson10102018
    wilson10102018 Posts: 1,306 Member
    Options
    The ratings for cooked meat take into account the reduction in fat and moisture from cooking. Weighing raw does not. I can't imagine why someone would use a raw weight on cooked meat. Have you folks not seen the USDA database which offers calorie data on various types of cooked meat?