Pasta is SO calorific!
Replies
-
The point of my post was to show the OP that if they want to have pasta it can work it into their meal plans. Maybe not as much as he/she was accustomed to. I love pasta...cheese...chicken...burgers...etc...etc. So I look for ways to make the foods that I love work for me.
OP...If you are a volume eater then maybe pasta won't work for you. I struggle with the calories in rice (maybe because I can take it or leave). I cook a lot of Asian dishes and I always struggle when I put the rice on the plate. Lately I have started subbing some of the rice with roasted cauliflower.4 -
I still eat pasta if i want it, i just adapt the recipe to include some veggies to pack it out so that i can use less pasta! ;-)3
-
Looks delicious, Annie. With the chicken and broccoli I also think your smaller serving could feel like plenty.
It came out to be about 2 cups of the pasta dish. That should be plenty for a 66y/o lightly active woman. Is that enough volume wise for some people...maybe not. I however found it filling for me. I also found the macros good for me...38 carbs...18 fat...37...protein.4 -
I often think the suggested serving size of pasta and rice is not accurate...for example (and I've just double checked this), in a 500g pack of fusilli pasta the "suggested" serving size on the nutrition info is 170g (300 calories)...which means you don't even have 3 portions in that pack...that always annoys me...I'd rather cook 100g (176 cal) of Pasta to obtain 5 portions from the pack and boost each portion with veg and whatever meat or vegetable protein there is to achieve a reasonable meal without overloading on the pasta...
It also annoys me that 500g bags of rice have suggested servings of 75g per person...because again that leaves you with uneven portions (6.66 to be exact)...which apart from being another case of a leftover headache is clearly a representation of the Number of The Beast! (maybe I've discovered something here...)
Using 50g of rice per person gives you 10 portions of rice and you won't be damned in the flames of hell! lol! That probably speaks more about my thriftyness in portion saving than anything else...but it's something to ponder...3 -
If you say so but can you only eat just 1 serving? I'm skeptical but I'm not the one eating it. Never would.
Why wouldn't she eat "just" one serving? Chicken, pasta, sauce (I personally am not a fan of most creamy sauces but that has nothing to do with calories or fat), broccoli. Sounds like a good meal to me.
LOL As far as I know I have never communicated with the "sgt" so I am not sure why his odd response. I understood his doubts on the calories (kind of) because when I first made the recipe I too had doubts. That is why I went back and initially rechecked the ingredient entries.
As far as him doubting how much that I ate...well...who knows about that one. I found that whole post insulting.
5 -
I often think the suggested serving size of pasta and rice is not accurate...for example (and I've just double checked this), in a 500g pack of fusilli pasta the "suggested" serving size on the nutrition info is 170g (300 calories)...which means you don't even have 3 portions in that pack...that always annoys me...I'd rather cook 100g (176 cal) of Pasta to obtain 5 portions from the pack and boost each portion with veg and whatever meat or vegetable protein there is to achieve a reasonable meal without overloading on the pasta...
It also annoys me that 500g bags of rice have suggested servings of 75g per person...because again that leaves you with uneven portions (6.66 to be exact)...which apart from being another case of a leftover headache is clearly a representation of the Number of The Beast! (maybe I've discovered something here...)
Using 50g of rice per person gives you 10 portions of rice and you won't be damned in the flames of hell! lol! That probably speaks more about my thriftyness in portion saving than anything else...but it's something to ponder...
You’re running into the issue of dried vs cooked weight here though. 170g of pasta weighed in dried form would be a massive portion! The information you’re looking at is the portion if you’re weighing it cooked, so it includes the volume of water the dried pasta absorbed during cooking. Some pasta packs will state a serving size of 56g dried weight as a portion. That 56g will weigh approximately 170g when weighed after cooking.4 -
And the reason pasta servings on the label are indicated from dry weight is also because different people cook their pasta to varying levels of 'doneness.' The softer you like your pasta, the more water it will have absorbed through the longer boiling time, making cooked weights highly inaccurate.1
-
BarbaraHelen2013 wrote: »You’re running into the issue of dried vs cooked weight here though. 170g of pasta weighed in dried form would be a massive portion! The information you’re looking at is the portion if you’re weighing it cooked, so it includes the volume of water the dried pasta absorbed during cooking. Some pasta packs will state a serving size of 56g dried weight as a portion. That 56g will weigh approximately 170g when weighed after cooking.
Ah! You see you learn something new every day! Thank you BabaraHelen2013! But I also see...by looking closer at the instructions on the webpage for the pasta (https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/products/254878545)...the suggested 75g of uncooked pasta...which gives you the 6.66 portions per this pack...and the devil's jiggery-pokery ensues again! lol!
But if I calculate correctly...a 50g "dry" weight serving would garner approximately 113g cooked weight at 200kcal...so a saving of 100kcal as well as the opportunity for 10 portions in a pack...2 -
I’m really worried now. I weighed myself 200g cooked pasta thinking it amounted to 350calories, br that seems wrong0
-
I’m really worried now. I weighed myself 200g cooked pasta thinking it amounted to 350calories, br that seems wrong
i don't think its too horribly off...56g dry pasta is about 200 cal and cooks to about 170g...but google is our friend when it comes to finding dry info (since i know the package you had only included the cooked weight)0 -
-
snickerscharlie wrote: »And the reason pasta servings on the label are indicated from dry weight is also because different people cook their pasta to varying levels of 'doneness.' The softer you like your pasta, the more water it will have absorbed through the longer boiling time, making cooked weights highly inaccurate.
But if you cook it as instructed...that will be accurate yes?!0 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »And the reason pasta servings on the label are indicated from dry weight is also because different people cook their pasta to varying levels of 'doneness.' The softer you like your pasta, the more water it will have absorbed through the longer boiling time, making cooked weights highly inaccurate.
But if you cook it as instructed...that will be accurate yes?!
my box has a range of cooking times - typically it says cook 8 to 10min (and then says if you want al dante cook less) - so that is still a range2 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »And the reason pasta servings on the label are indicated from dry weight is also because different people cook their pasta to varying levels of 'doneness.' The softer you like your pasta, the more water it will have absorbed through the longer boiling time, making cooked weights highly inaccurate.
But if you cook it as instructed...that will be accurate yes?!
I just find it easier to use the dry weight of the pasta, because then I know it's accurate, regardless of how I cook it.
4 -
Thanks all0
-
BarbaraHelen2013 wrote: »You’re running into the issue of dried vs cooked weight here though. 170g of pasta weighed in dried form would be a massive portion! The information you’re looking at is the portion if you’re weighing it cooked, so it includes the volume of water the dried pasta absorbed during cooking. Some pasta packs will state a serving size of 56g dried weight as a portion. That 56g will weigh approximately 170g when weighed after cooking.
Ah! You see you learn something new every day! Thank you BabaraHelen2013! But I also see...by looking closer at the instructions on the webpage for the pasta (https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/products/254878545)...the suggested 75g of uncooked pasta...which gives you the 6.66 portions per this pack...and the devil's jiggery-pokery ensues again! lol!
But if I calculate correctly...a 50g "dry" weight serving would garner approximately 113g cooked weight at 200kcal...so a saving of 100kcal as well as the opportunity for 10 portions in a pack...
Just from recent posts in a number of threads I'm getting the sense that in the UK packages more commonly give cooked weight, and that standard portion size for pasta (on bags, anyway) is different.
In the US I pretty much always see dry weight, and based on a 2 oz (56 g) size.1 -
deannalfisher wrote: »my box has a range of cooking times - typically it says cook 8 to 10min (and then says if you want al dante cook less) - so that is still a range
Crap! Yes...just double checked the link I posted earlier...that says 10-12 minutes...so it's a case of weighing it after cooking and doing the maths...0 -
deannalfisher wrote: »my box has a range of cooking times - typically it says cook 8 to 10min (and then says if you want al dante cook less) - so that is still a range
Crap! Yes...just double checked the link I posted earlier...that says 10-12 minutes...so it's a case of weighing it after cooking and doing the maths...
or just weighing it before...if you cook 56g of dry pasta for 10min and it comes out to 120g or 56g for 12 min and it comes out to 150g...its base is still 56g dry - that is why dry is recommended3 -
Yes but dry isn’t available on the packet or website, that’s why I posted about this.
It’s v annoying.
1 -
^^ this
honestly in all my years of eating pasta - i think a standard serving is between 50-60g dry andi 've eaten multiple brands in multiple places over the years0 -
BarbaraHelen2013 wrote: »You’re running into the issue of dried vs cooked weight here though. 170g of pasta weighed in dried form would be a massive portion! The information you’re looking at is the portion if you’re weighing it cooked, so it includes the volume of water the dried pasta absorbed during cooking. Some pasta packs will state a serving size of 56g dried weight as a portion. That 56g will weigh approximately 170g when weighed after cooking.
Ah! You see you learn something new every day! Thank you BabaraHelen2013! But I also see...by looking closer at the instructions on the webpage for the pasta (https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/products/254878545)...the suggested 75g of uncooked pasta...which gives you the 6.66 portions per this pack...and the devil's jiggery-pokery ensues again! lol!
But if I calculate correctly...a 50g "dry" weight serving would garner approximately 113g cooked weight at 200kcal...so a saving of 100kcal as well as the opportunity for 10 portions in a pack...
Just from recent posts in a number of threads I'm getting the sense that in the UK packages more commonly give cooked weight, and that standard portion size for pasta (on bags, anyway) is different.
In the US I pretty much always see dry weight, and based on a 2 oz (56 g) size.
I’ve just done a quick check of all the pasta packs in my cupboard and it becomes more confusing the more you look at them! I have a range of shapes (spaghetti, penne, rigatoni, orzo and tagliatelle currently) from various different UK supermarkets - all own brand. In the nutritional information panel they all give the cals per 100g cooked and per 200g cooked. (Though why the second column cannot be simply extrapolated from the first is beyond me).
Underneath the nutrition panel some shapes/brands actually state that 90g dry pasta yields approx 200g when cooked as instructed. Some of these packs also - in a separate panel, on the side of the pack, often where there is a suggested recipe - state quite clearly to allow 56g weighed dry per person. Other shapes/brands give no information beyond what is contained in the nutritional info panel, there seems to be no brand consistency here either!
My conclusion; if they’re suggesting the pasta be used as part of a ‘recipe’ which has other ingredients 56g dry weight is a portion. However if you fancied your pasta plainly boiled with very little else then 90g is the right portion! 🙄2 -
If you say so but can you only eat just 1 serving? I'm skeptical but I'm not the one eating it. Never would.
Yes...I did for dinner tonight along with some broccoli. Appropriate servings sizes for me is something that I have been working on. Surprisingly it has been easier than I thought it would be. I don't finish dinner and have that overstuffed feeling. I still have room for a dessert if I wanted one.
I will remember not to ask you over for dinner on the nights that I am serving that dish.
Kudos to you for your graceful response to an extremely rude post. Sounds like you've been able to figure out what works for you. You go, girl! ☺3 -
Yes but dry isn’t available on the packet or website, that’s why I posted about this.
It’s v annoying.
Weighing it when cooked is going to be good enough. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
(Also, if you overcook the pasta it won't taste as good, but calorie wise you will be logging (slightly) more cals than you ate. Since more people likely overcook by accident than undercooking -- al dente would IMO be cooking correctly and the difference between that and what the cals are based on is also probably very slight -- it's not something to stress about.)4 -
Of course! It’s always the foods that taste the best which have the most calories0
-
A few days ago, I cooked 8 oz of spaghetti with the idea that hubs and I would have 2 servings as our dinner, with 2 left over for lunches. Typically, we mix the cooked pasta into the pot of sauce, so that it can absorb some of the sauce. This does increase the volume of the pasta, but doesn't dilute the flavor. I didn't weigh the cooked pasta, but we both had a hearty dinner portion, accompanied by a serving of squash. The remaining 'half' of the batch will easily make 4-5 lunch sized servings accompanied by a larger portion of vegetables than we had at dinner.0
-
I love pasta and I eat without guilt. lol0
-
I love pasta and it made me very sad when I actually started weighing it dry and realizing how many calories I was actually consuming - and how pathetically small the servings were (vs the calories out of my day). I can eat way more - like, WAY more - than I should!0
-
smoofinator wrote: »Yep. It's depressing. Peanut butter too! After I got a food scale, I was so sad about those serving sizes
Ditto. Before I started looking into nutritions, I like to eat peanut butter in hopes of stopping my cramps after intense workouts. Now I avoid it like the plague.
1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions