How does everyone weigh their raw meat?
Chelseataylor83
Posts: 1 Member
I heard that this app inputs most meats (chicken, beef, etc) as raw and that I should be multiplying by 1.5 for the true amount. What should I be multiplying by 1.5? Or should I be multiplying at all.
I’m doing keto and counting my macros and trying to see how much protein I’m at.
Thank you
I’m doing keto and counting my macros and trying to see how much protein I’m at.
Thank you
1
Replies
-
When logging meat, find an entry specifying raw or cooked. It is often helpful to add key words like "USDA", or be really specific, e.g. chicken breast, raw, meat only, boneless. You can verify the information by searching for the USDA information online for meat in that form.4
-
I don’t actually eat meat, but I do cook it for the family, and I’m completely confused by this ‘multiply raw weight by 1.5’ statement.
Where have you heard this and what is the rationale behind the idea that it somehow becomes bigger/more calorific when cooked? Meat generally shrinks on cooking, due to it releasing fat and water/moisture.
I guess I could see that if you weigh your meat after cooking but then pick a raw entry when logging that could be a very inaccurate rule of thumb, but why not just weigh it raw and cut out the uncertainty, if that’s what you meant?2 -
I prefer my meat cooked, that is how I weigh it.0
-
BarbaraHelen2013 wrote: »I don’t actually eat meat, but I do cook it for the family, and I’m completely confused by this ‘multiply raw weight by 1.5’ statement.
First I heard as well!
Meat actually is something I eyeball. If a pack is a lb (450 grammes), and I use this for our family of 4, I would log 125 grammes for myself (I round up usually).
3 -
Just look for a entry stating raw. You are complicating matters. Or if it is cooked meat, find an entry stating cooked (less accurate I guess, as the amount of water lost through cooking will vary a lot).2
-
BarbaraHelen2013 wrote: »I don’t actually eat meat, but I do cook it for the family, and I’m completely confused by this ‘multiply raw weight by 1.5’ statement.
Where have you heard this and what is the rationale behind the idea that it somehow becomes bigger/more calorific when cooked? Meat generally shrinks on cooking, due to it releasing fat and water/moisture.
I guess I could see that if you weigh your meat after cooking but then pick a raw entry when logging that could be a very inaccurate rule of thumb, but why not just weigh it raw and cut out the uncertainty, if that’s what you meant?
It does make sense, I just don't know how accurate it is. Meat loses moisture when it is cooking. This is saying that 150 grams of raw meat would weigh 100 grams once it is cooked ie 50 grams of water is lost.
To be most accurate though you would need to weigh your piece of meat raw, as how much weight is lost will depend on how long you cook it for. Rare will weigh a fair bit more than well done.1 -
Raw meat contains water, it becomes obvious when u cook it and water comes out. I guess measuring cooked meat feels more accurate1
-
I ask my butcher the weigh raw meat. I tell him the portion sizes required and he weighs it accordingly. Talk to your butcher.0
-
MohsenSALAH wrote: »Raw meat contains water, it becomes obvious when u cook it and water comes out. I guess measuring cooked meat feels more accurate
Yes but water has no calories, you have no way of knowing how much water has evaporated from a piece of cooked meat as it'll differ with cooking methods/heats, so raw IMO would be more accurate than cooked.6 -
Weighing meat raw only works if the fat is rendered into a dish which is then eaten - like beef stew. However, since certain meats have very little fat to render during cooking, it hardly matters as to those - like chicken breast.
But if you are cooking beef or pork or the fattier parts of chicken, only weighing what you are actually eating matters.
PS: Ignore entries in the MFP database that are not product labels or USDA sourced. They are almost always wrong.2 -
I get what you’re saying and I use the 1.5 myself, and cane to it on my own. I often forget to weigh meat before I cook it, and have those head slapping moments afterwards.
Or, like Sunday, I made a massive batch of carnitas to eat off of all week. I’ll heat four ounces of cooked carnitas to throw on top of a salad, but count it as six ounces for logging purposes.
Ditto leftover chopped steak or other meats for my daily salad.3 -
There are raw entries and cooked entries. The most accurate entries (USDA) specify, and if you have a package, the information on the package will be raw unless it says otherwise. If there is some reason you cannot weigh raw (I never weigh bone-in meats raw), then weigh cooked and use a cooked entry. More accurate than assuming you multiply 1.5 (although good for you realizing you can't use a raw entry for cooked food).3
-
I mostly weigh raw - then cook it, taking into account any cals added in that process - eg sauce or oil. If you are having a piece of grilled/roast or whatever meat and forget or it's awkward to weigh before cooking look on mfp database for the cooked value. eg I weigh my roast chicken/roast beef cooked and look up the value for roast leg/breast etc according to what I put on my plate Keep it simple1
-
I don't eat much meat but weigh all my fish raw.0
-
Chelseataylor83 wrote: »I heard that this app inputs most meats (chicken, beef, etc) as raw and that I should be multiplying by 1.5 for the true amount. What should I be multiplying by 1.5? Or should I be multiplying at all.
I’m doing keto and counting my macros and trying to see how much protein I’m at.
Thank you
Whoever told you that was misinformed. The admin-created entries pulled from the USDA database will include raw or cooked in the description.
Unfortunately, the "verified" green check marks in the MFP database are used for both user-created entries and admin-created entries that MFP pulled from the USDA database. To find admin entries for whole foods, I get the syntax from the USDA database and paste that into MFP.
Note: any MFP entry that includes "USDA" was user entered.
Ex:- Chicken, broilers or fryers, thigh, meat only, cooked, roasted
- Chicken, broiler or fryers, breast, skinless, boneless, meat only, raw
- Pork, cured, bacon, cooked, microwaved
- Beef, ribeye cap steak, boneless, separable lean only, trimmed to 0" fat, all grades, cooked, grilled
- Beef - Ground, 85% lean meat / 15% fat, raw (hamburger)
1 -
I create a recipe. Ingredients are raw meat at raw weight plus whatever oil. Cook. Weigh cooked meat in grams and make that the number of servings. Cut my portion, weigh in grams, and make that the number of servings in my food diary.0
-
I am confused by this statement. Are you saying that if you weight something cooked, you multiply it by 1.5 to get the raw weight? That is the statement that tracks the closest to what I can think.
The ideal thing to do is weigh your meats raw, because that is the most accurate way to get their starting weight. Let's say you have 6 ounces of raw meat. It has 240 calories. That is the number of calories it has. You don't need to multiply it by anything. When you cook that weight, it will weigh less because water cooks out of it.
So if you weigh you meats cooked, you either have to use a cooked entry, or do math to get your raw amount. That is probably what you are hearing. But multiying cooked weight by 1.5 is too muhh in my opinion unless you cook your food extra well done. Most estimates are closer to 1.33 (3oz of cooked meat to 4 ounces of raw)
It is recommended to weigh everything raw because that is the most accurate. How much water you lose while cooking depends on cooking method and time. So if you are weighing cooked, it will always be a bit of an estimate as to how many calories you have. But it is better to weigh cooked than not at all.2 -
as far as the 'x 1.5' goes...i think they were doing the raw vs cooked ratio? sometimes, if i'm cooking for the kids too and can't segregate my portion our ahead of time, i'll weigh all the meat raw, then weigh is all cooked, and divide to get the difference.
for example: if chicken is 2oz raw, then 1oz cooked, i'll multiply the cooked by 2 in order to get the correct entry weight.
that being said, i pretty much use this exclusively now. there are generally entries for both raw and cooked.
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10621050/how-to-use-the-usda-food-database-mfp-food-database-for-accurate-logging/p1
0 -
@MikePTY Yep. What you said.
I often flat out forget to weigh meat. Or I’ve unwrapped it when I do remember and by then it’s a PITA to weigh.
I do like my meats well done. If I’m cooking a four or five pound piece of meat, as I did this weekend for a dinner party with intentional leftovers, a quick calculation method for cooked meats versus raw works for me and it keeps me inside my calorie allotment.
I always have extra cooked meat in the fridge and freezer for my salads, to help meet my protein macro.
Whether cooked meat is 1.33 or 1.5X raw meat is so little difference it’s just easier to use the rounder number.
If I’m under, I’m probably making up for those few calories I missed somewhere else.0 -
There are USDA sourced entries in the database for both raw and cooked meat, and I would assume the calorie difference tracks pretty well with this 1.5 ratio, it might actually be the source of it. All you have to do is use the correct entry when you log.
If you weigh raw chicken, search something like "chicken thigh, raw".
If you weight it cooked, search "chicken thigh, roasted".
Easy peasy
1 -
Lillymoo01 wrote: »BarbaraHelen2013 wrote: »
I guess I could see that if you weigh your meat after cooking but then pick a raw entry when logging that could be a very inaccurate rule of thumb, but why not just weigh it raw and cut out the uncertainty, if that’s what you meant?
It does make sense, I just don't know how accurate it is. Meat loses moisture when it is cooking. This is saying that 150 grams of raw meat would weigh 100 grams once it is cooked ie 50 grams of water is lost.
To be most accurate though you would need to weigh your piece of meat raw, as how much weight is lost will depend on how long you cook it for. Rare will weigh a fair bit more than well done.
I guess raw could weigh 1.5X more than cooked a very exact and specific way... wherein if you calculated raw calories... then wanted to eat only a portion of cooked and recalculate... you could estimate that the cooked weight is around 75%. However, I really feel this isn't necessary or the most accurate. Weigh raw and then look at the fraction you are eating cooked, or just weigh cooked. This won't be the thing to make or break you as long as you are weighing it and accounting for ADDED fats. No two cows are the same anyways.1 -
wilson10102018 wrote: »Weighing meat raw only works if the fat is rendered into a dish which is then eaten - like beef stew. However, since certain meats have very little fat to render during cooking, it hardly matters as to those - like chicken breast.
But if you are cooking beef or pork or the fattier parts of chicken, only weighing what you are actually eating matters.
PS: Ignore entries in the MFP database that are not product labels or USDA sourced. They are almost always wrong.
I look at it in the bigger scope. I always know I will have restaurant meals here and there that will require guessing and/or faith in a restaurant website that is allowed to be off as much as 20 percent. I weigh everything raw and unless there are bones involved I accept that I am a little over.
With that said though I almost always lose weight slightly ahead of my desired rate of loss. Not dramatically faster but my best guess is that I log too high by an average of 100 calories per day. This would not be idea for anyone who is at the minimum nutrition lines (1200 for women, 1500 for men) or already struggling with too few calories in a day.0 -
I look at it in the bigger scope. I always know I will have restaurant meals here and there that will require guessing and/or faith in a restaurant website that is allowed to be off as much as 20 percent. I weigh everything raw and unless there are bones involved I accept that I am a little over.
With that said though I almost always lose weight slightly ahead of my desired rate of loss. Not dramatically faster but my best guess is that I log too high by an average of 100 calories per day. This would not be idea for anyone who is at the minimum nutrition lines (1200 for women, 1500 for men) or already struggling with too few calories in a day.
I'm not seeing that as the "bigger scope." Human nature being what it is, guesstimating will most likely result in the opposite results. And, if we evaluate calorie counting methodology by results you achieved, I'm not sure why we would bother with it. Its a process. it has steps. Follow the steps and you lose the weight.0 -
springlering62 wrote: »@MikePTY Yep. What you said.
I often flat out forget to weigh meat. Or I’ve unwrapped it when I do remember and by then it’s a PITA to weigh.
I do like my meats well done. If I’m cooking a four or five pound piece of meat, as I did this weekend for a dinner party with intentional leftovers, a quick calculation method for cooked meats versus raw works for me and it keeps me inside my calorie allotment.
I always have extra cooked meat in the fridge and freezer for my salads, to help meet my protein macro.
Whether cooked meat is 1.33 or 1.5X raw meat is so little difference it’s just easier to use the rounder number.
If I’m under, I’m probably making up for those few calories I missed somewhere else.
Why not just use a cooked weight.3 -
wilson10102018 wrote: »
I look at it in the bigger scope. I always know I will have restaurant meals here and there that will require guessing and/or faith in a restaurant website that is allowed to be off as much as 20 percent. I weigh everything raw and unless there are bones involved I accept that I am a little over.
With that said though I almost always lose weight slightly ahead of my desired rate of loss. Not dramatically faster but my best guess is that I log too high by an average of 100 calories per day. This would not be idea for anyone who is at the minimum nutrition lines (1200 for women, 1500 for men) or already struggling with too few calories in a day.
I'm not seeing that as the "bigger scope." Human nature being what it is, guesstimating will most likely result in the opposite results. And, if we evaluate calorie counting methodology by results you achieved, I'm not sure why we would bother with it. Its a process. it has steps. Follow the steps and you lose the weight.
But "guesstimating" is exactly what you are doing, whichever way you choose. When you have finished cooking a piece of meat, you don't know exactly how much fat, or water, might be left in what you are going to eat. You are then probably using the USDA measured value for calories and macros of cooked meat. But the USDA had to use an assumption or average of how much of the fat and moisture will "typically" cook off a chicken thigh or ribeye, and an assumption as to how long the average person would cook the meat. Those are essentially guesstimates.
If we both buy a ribeye, but yours is just slightly fattier and you cook it to rare, mine was a little less fatty and I cook it to just over medium, we might both end up with 5 oz and log the same calories, but they weren't actually the same calories. Or we could both log a 6 oz raw ribeye, you cook it less, I cook it more. We will both probably be a little off on the actual calories too.
There is obviously room to disagree over which is more accurate, but both are estimates. I tend to choose leaner meats and will often cook other elements of the meal in the pan with the meat drippings or make a sauce with it, so logging raw makes more sense to me as I am likely eating most (if not all) of the fat it started with. If you tend to buy fattier cuts but cook off a lot of the fat and then discard it, then maybe weighing cooked would be more logical for you to use.4 -
wilson10102018 wrote: »
I look at it in the bigger scope. I always know I will have restaurant meals here and there that will require guessing and/or faith in a restaurant website that is allowed to be off as much as 20 percent. I weigh everything raw and unless there are bones involved I accept that I am a little over.
With that said though I almost always lose weight slightly ahead of my desired rate of loss. Not dramatically faster but my best guess is that I log too high by an average of 100 calories per day. This would not be idea for anyone who is at the minimum nutrition lines (1200 for women, 1500 for men) or already struggling with too few calories in a day.
I'm not seeing that as the "bigger scope." Human nature being what it is, guesstimating will most likely result in the opposite results. And, if we evaluate calorie counting methodology by results you achieved, I'm not sure why we would bother with it. Its a process. it has steps. Follow the steps and you lose the weight.
Obviously different people will have different results. Since everything is an average not a precise calculation though I tend to err on the side of generous logging. I don't worry about how I cheat myself here and there because my end result is that I am not really cheated unless you count the 100 calories a day. 100 calories would sometimes be explained in part or full by non exercise activity not food. Unless someone is in a coma activity is also a number that varies day to day but we use averages because there is no way to know precisely.
Logging precision is going to vary from person to person. As I have said I am not here to win an award for most beautiful and accurate log I am here to lose weight. If I stop losing as expected I will tighten up my logging some more.0 -
-
wilson10102018 wrote: »
In my experience, this is often harder to find and the USDA database provides decent information based on raw weight that readily available. I would wager there's also less variance in water content based on nuances in cooking conditions, and end cook temp, not to mention necessary for some methods of cooking where the end product weight may include other ingredients. It really doesn't take that much effort to weigh proteins raw, I've never understood why this is such a hotly debated topic.1 -
springlering62 wrote: »@MikePTY Yep. What you said.
I often flat out forget to weigh meat. Or I’ve unwrapped it when I do remember and by then it’s a PITA to weigh.
I do like my meats well done. If I’m cooking a four or five pound piece of meat, as I did this weekend for a dinner party with intentional leftovers, a quick calculation method for cooked meats versus raw works for me and it keeps me inside my calorie allotment.
I always have extra cooked meat in the fridge and freezer for my salads, to help meet my protein macro.
Whether cooked meat is 1.33 or 1.5X raw meat is so little difference it’s just easier to use the rounder number.
If I’m under, I’m probably making up for those few calories I missed somewhere else.
Why not just use a cooked weight.
Yep. Everyone (I assume) forgets to weigh their meat before cooking on occasion. I see no reason to get the calculator involved when a cooked entry will suffice.1 -
wilson10102018 wrote: »
In my experience, this is often harder to find and the USDA database provides decent information based on raw weight that readily available. I would wager there's also less variance in water content based on nuances in cooking conditions, and end cook temp, not to mention necessary for some methods of cooking where the end product weight may include other ingredients. It really doesn't take that much effort to weigh proteins raw, I've never understood why this is such a hotly debated topic.
I think having a log that is effectively helping you with whatever goal you are trying to achieve makes it a pretty personal thing. Mine is now 511 days old so it is like an old friend. I am reluctant to change my habits until they stop working and I imagine most other people are the same. When a new person hasn't formed a system yet it kind of brings out the debate a little because everyone is right for themselves but may not be right for others or the new person logging. However seeing the different ideas might help someone form an opinion about how to proceed.
1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 440 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions