Incorrect nutrition value

2»

Replies

  • Kathryn247
    Kathryn247 Posts: 570 Member
    wainsweb1 wrote: »
    Ok, so I'm now using My Foods and the list is getting longer each day because sodium values have been incorrectly entered. But what a faff it then is if I want to enter a food item from it and I can't remember how the text starts, or whether I have actually entered it before. Wouldn't it be good if, when the barcode is scanned, I was given the option of using My Foods if I'd saved it previously.

    You have to remember how it starts. The search will look for the letter combination anywhere in the name, so if you search for "cinn" it will find "cinnamon bread" and "apple cinnamon" (if you have those 2 things in your my foods list). If you haven't entered anything with "cinn" in it, it will tell you that, too.
  • wainsweb1
    wainsweb1 Posts: 17 Member
    Ok, many thanks Kathryn. I will persevere👍
  • nighthawk584
    nighthawk584 Posts: 2,023 Member
    I've just gotten use to checking against labels or USDA or other sources on the internet. Pain in the butt, but I'm using it for free, so can't complain too much
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,052 Member
    wainsweb1 wrote: »
    It will be difficult to police the database, so why don't MFP make it less open to errors. The requirement to show salt is a European-wide directive, which accounts for a pretty big population. If the reason sodium is used by MFP is because most of the world refers to that and not to salt, then maybe MFP ought to say how to convert salt to sodium. The bottom line remains, and is my original comment, that members who submit nutrition values should be more thorough so that others can rely on the data without having to check new food items each time they are entered. In addition, if MFP say they will review 'Submit A Correction' reports, then that's what they should do. They said it.

    I agree with you in theory, but in reality this doesn't happen. I've made my peace with it.

    I eat mostly whole foods and use entries from the USDA database, so the few times I have to double check user-entered entries doesn't really bother me.
  • Kathryn247
    Kathryn247 Posts: 570 Member
    wainsweb1 wrote: »
    Ok, many thanks Kathryn. I will persevere👍

    Sorry - I meant to say "You *don't* have to remember how it starts," kind of an important word to miss! :)
  • Itmustbu
    Itmustbu Posts: 19 Member
    @wainsweb1

    Not everyone is interested in tracking salt/sodium or fill in the blank so a lot of the entries are incomplete/wrong...that’s life on a free app. I personally am glad to be able to create my own entries. Lets say I am making chilli, I can enter the entire recipe as one serving then divide it up from there and I don’t have to worry about mfp or other users changing it.

    I do want to thank you. When you wrote you sent a report and when the error wasn’t corrected you reported the report malfunction I had quite a laugh.

    Hope the new app works out
  • wainsweb1
    wainsweb1 Posts: 17 Member
    Thank you all for your comments. All very much understood. From the UK to the US: hope you all have a great weekend
  • windra06
    windra06 Posts: 50 Member
    I eat mostly whole foods and have learnt to just go with my instinct and if unsure just go on the safe side. I've found even with verified items there to be inaccuracy, for example I just went and searched for potato to demonstrate. The top verified entry 'Potato' gave me 56cal for 100g, next one down verified was 'Potato (medium)' I changed the drop down to 100g and it gave me 110cal for 1x100g.The third ones verified 'potatoes' 1 cup I changed the drop down to be in grams and for 100g it gave me 80cal. None of these say whether it's raw or cooked value so likely could explain some incaracies.
    If I find a discrepancy with packaged food I adjust portion size til it's close to matching. At the end of the day it serves its job, its close enough to be an effective tool if you're smart but it is painful to have to check everything rather than just pick the top results and be sure it's fine.
  • lemurcat2
    lemurcat2 Posts: 7,885 Member
    windra06 wrote: »
    I eat mostly whole foods and have learnt to just go with my instinct and if unsure just go on the safe side. I've found even with verified items there to be inaccuracy, for example I just went and searched for potato to demonstrate. The top verified entry 'Potato' gave me 56cal for 100g, next one down verified was 'Potato (medium)' I changed the drop down to 100g and it gave me 110cal for 1x100g.The third ones verified 'potatoes' 1 cup I changed the drop down to be in grams and for 100g it gave me 80cal. None of these say whether it's raw or cooked value so likely could explain some incaracies.
    If I find a discrepancy with packaged food I adjust portion size til it's close to matching. At the end of the day it serves its job, its close enough to be an effective tool if you're smart but it is painful to have to check everything rather than just pick the top results and be sure it's fine.

    The trick with whole foods is to learn to find the USDA entries that we input by MFP years ago.

    One tipoff is that they will have raw or cooked (and cooking method). They also will have lots of measurement options.

    If looking for potatoes, I'd search for "potatoes, raw."

Categories