Different calories on box than bar code

krumpledwhiskers
krumpledwhiskers Posts: 2 Member
in Food and Nutrition
Has anyone else noticed this? There are quite a few products that I use that list calories on the box that are different than when I scan the barcode on the same box. It drives me crazy. I had a popsicle last night that said 50 calories on the box and it said 70 when I scanned. And I found that a lot of cereal scans differently as well. Does anyone know why this is and which one is correct??

Replies

  • Noreenmarie1234
    Noreenmarie1234 Posts: 7,492 Member
    The one on the box. Many entries are wrong in here so aways go with the box.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    krumpledwhiskers wrote: »
    Has anyone else noticed this? There are quite a few products that I use that list calories on the box that are different than when I scan the barcode on the same box. It drives me crazy. I had a popsicle last night that said 50 calories on the box and it said 70 when I scanned. And I found that a lot of cereal scans differently as well. Does anyone know why this is and which one is correct??

    The box. When you scan, it's just pulling an entry from the database just as if you had done a manual search. Most database entries are user entered and can be wrong...in other situations, the nutritional information for a product actually changes and the manufacturer re-labels...but the scan could pull up an entry that doesn't have the information from the updated labeling.
  • goal06082021
    goal06082021 Posts: 2,130 Member
    bold_rabbit wrote: »
    Quick explanation:

    Nearly all entries in the database, including the ones that come up from scanning, were entered by other MFP users.

    In the US, at least, all labels were updated recently to change details (adding potassium, "added sugars", etc). For many products this also updated calories. Perhaps because it's more accurate than before, or serving size changed, or recipe changed, or another reason. UPCs (the barcode) were not changed in most cases.

    Therefore, when you scan, you are picking up an old entry and not the most recent one.

    The folks who own MFP do not edit or delete items from the database.

    QFT. Nobody's watching the database and updating it - the bar code itself doesn't contain the nutrition information, it's just that this bar code was at one point attached to this particular food that another user added to the database at some point in the last 15 years. If you scan something and it doesn't match, search for an entry that is correct or add a new one.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    Mfp food database is a train wreck always go wrong the box or cross check entries...
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    goal06082021 wrote: »
    bold_rabbit wrote: »
    Quick explanation:

    Nearly all entries in the database, including the ones that come up from scanning, were entered by other MFP users.

    In the US, at least, all labels were updated recently to change details (adding potassium, "added sugars", etc). For many products this also updated calories. Perhaps because it's more accurate than before, or serving size changed, or recipe changed, or another reason. UPCs (the barcode) were not changed in most cases.

    Therefore, when you scan, you are picking up an old entry and not the most recent one.

    The folks who own MFP do not edit or delete items from the database.

    QFT. Nobody's watching the database and updating it - the bar code itself doesn't contain the nutrition information, it's just that this bar code was at one point attached to this particular food that another user added to the database at some point in the last 15 years. If you scan something and it doesn't match, search for an entry that is correct or add a new one.

    It’s that old Reagan line - trust but verify
  • KatyP86
    KatyP86 Posts: 164 Member
    I've noticed it a few times. Not sure which one is correct but I just use the one with higher calories in my diary to be on the safe side. Would rather eat a few less calories than more by accident.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,011 Member
    When you scan the bar code, all it does is read the name of the product, then searches the database just as if you had typed the product name into the search bar. It seems really hi tech like it's downloading current info straight from the manufacturer but it's not. Just identifying the product and searching through the user entered database. You should go by the box.

Categories