Weighing or measuring
Happily_somber
Posts: 2 Member
Which is more accurate, weighing or measuring a serving of food? Three ounces of boneless chicken looks much more than two ounces, and three ounces of brown rice weighed is much more than 1/3 cup. Your answer will be a huge help to me.
1
Replies
-
Weighing is the most accurate.1
-
Absolutely 100% definitely, no doubt about it - weighing is more accurate!
Can you tell I’m trying to drive the point home!? 😂
1 -
Calories in food (and macros) are in relation to weight and not volume.
Think of a cup of grated cheese, sprinkled in lightly or packed down tightly - going to be very different weights and have very different calories.2 -
Weighing is more accurate.
I'd suggest weighing in grams because they're more "fine grained" so more precise. (Many scales measure in ounces/tenths or whole grams. There are about 28 grams in an ounce, vs. ten tenths, so grams are more precise.) Usually I can find database entries in grams, for most foods, too. It takes some searching the first time, sometimes, but once they're in my recent/frequent foods, it's quick to log them next time.
Weighing is not only more accurate, it's quicker and easier IMO, once you know the tricks for using a scale. Despite the silly click-bait joke-y title, this thread is about efficient ways to use a food scale, for people who choose to use one.
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10498882/weighing-food-takes-too-long-and-is-obsessive/p1
I don't argue that people must weigh food in order to succeed, but the answer to your question is that it is more accurate.0 -
Weighing raw (prior to cooking) is best and the most accurate.1
-
It's so *not even close* that it even makes sense to people like myself to weigh liquids given the inaccuracies with many volume based measuring devices and the convenience of using a scale for everything when it is just sitting there.
Temperature and contents and conversion tables for weight to ml may come into play. Scales that claim to measure ml aren't... they're just lying and using 1g = 1ml. Usually the 1:1 ml to g correspondence holds true... except for items with a lot of fat and either very little or no air at all. So not so true for ice cream or whipped cream. And a small but meaningful difference for oils for example if you expect 15g to be equal to one tbsp (it is closer to 13.2g on average). In any case, you're better off finding official per (100) gram values if you can.
Also beware of zero Cal items. They are often just under 5 Cal for the "portion" they choose to display. Which then legally allows them to call themselves zero Cal.
Often 100g values for these items will be different. Check out yellow mustard for example at about 69 Cal per 100g. Not a lot. But not really zero. Spray oil is another example where each gram missing from the container is just about 9 Cal... not quite the zero cal per 1/4 second spray the label is implying.
1 -
You also need to make sure you are weighing the right thing - like your rice. Cooked rice has much more volume than uncooked rice, so you need to pay attention to whether the calories are for cooked or raw and use the correct one.0
-
Weighing in grams. Everyone else has given a good rundown, so I'd just like to add that pasta, like rice is weighed before cooking. Both absorb water or other liquids during cooking and depending on how long you cook them the weight changes.1
-
snowflake954 wrote: »Weighing in grams. Everyone else has given a good rundown, so I'd just like to add that pasta, like rice is weighed before cooking. Both absorb water or other liquids during cooking and depending on how long you cook them the weight changes.
In addition to this, other foods lose water during baking or grilling, can gain it during boiling or other in-liquid cooking methods. Raw weight has less variability for virtually everything, is preferred for weighing accuracy-wise, when possible.
Some of my roasted veggies lose half their weight during roasting. Most veggies aren't calorie dense, but I'd bet meats can do the same. (I'm vegetarian, so . . . um, I know tofu loses a lot of weight in baking, too?😉)
But OP: No need to obsess about accuracy, either. Sometimes we see people her go off the deep end a bit, refuse to have dinner at a friend's house or eat at a restaurant because they can't weigh their food or know the recipe, panic if they forget to weigh something while cooking. Accuracy is useful, but no need to get stressed or give in to drama about it, y'know?1 -
For what it's worth, I lost about 35 pounds two years ago. I bought a food scale and used it twice.
Of course, the scale is more accurate. However, I'm a Neanderthal, used measuring cups and spoons, ate the same kind of food many times, and eyeballed a lot of it. I didn't have any problems losing the weight.
To repeat, the scale removes all doubt, but that doesn't mean that you must use a scale or you can't lose weight. I found the weighing process aggravating. They say the best method is the one you're willing to do.2 -
For what it's worth, I lost about 35 pounds two years ago. I bought a food scale and used it twice.
Of course, the scale is more accurate. However, I'm a Neanderthal, used measuring cups and spoons, ate the same kind of food many times, and eyeballed a lot of it. I didn't have any problems losing the weight.
To repeat, the scale removes all doubt, but that doesn't mean that you must use a scale or you can't lose weight. I found the weighing process aggravating. They say the best method is the one you're willing to do.
Certainly True. I have a set from Ikea that I use for scooping spices out of my spice pots (I still weight the pots as my spice use can be very calorie heavy) and for measuring liquids for cooking. But I'm constantly annoying that I have to wash them. Which I don't have to when using the scale. Using the scale for me is a very quick affair though. Only takes a few seconds for a complete dish inbetween prepping and cooking. And as my day-time food is typical for my home country (slices of bread with stuff, and muesli) it's even faster.1 -
Certainly True. I have a set from Ikea that I use for scooping spices out of my spice pots (I still weight the pots as my spice use can be very calorie heavy) and for measuring liquids for cooking. But I'm constantly annoying that I have to wash them. Which I don't have to when using the scale. Using the scale for me is a very quick affair though. Only takes a few seconds for a complete dish inbetween prepping and cooking. And as my day-time food is typical for my home country (slices of bread with stuff, and muesli) it's even faster.
Maybe I'm missing something (always possible!), but I still had to put my food on something or in something when I weighed it on the scale. I still had to wash a container, unless the food was like an apple that I could put on a napkin.
I say try both and use the method that works best for you. Especially if you have problems losing weight, then by all means use a scale -- eyeballing a tablespoon of peanut butter the wrong way can add a hundred or more calories.
2 -
Certainly True. I have a set from Ikea that I use for scooping spices out of my spice pots (I still weight the pots as my spice use can be very calorie heavy) and for measuring liquids for cooking. But I'm constantly annoying that I have to wash them. Which I don't have to when using the scale. Using the scale for me is a very quick affair though. Only takes a few seconds for a complete dish inbetween prepping and cooking. And as my day-time food is typical for my home country (slices of bread with stuff, and muesli) it's even faster.
Maybe I'm missing something (always possible!), but I still had to put my food on something or in something when I weighed it on the scale. I still had to wash a container, unless the food was like an apple that I could put on a napkin.
I say try both and use the method that works best for you. Especially if you have problems losing weight, then by all means use a scale -- eyeballing a tablespoon of peanut butter the wrong way can add a hundred or more calories.
The thread I linked covers that.
Sample: Sandwich. Put plate on scale. Tare/zero. Put bread on plate. Note weight. Tare/Zero, squirt mustard. Note. Tare/zero. Apply first meat/cheese type ingredient. Note. Etc. No extra plates or measuring do-dads.
Jarred things like peanut butter, put jar on scale, lid off. Tare/zero. Scoop some out with knife. Read negative value on scale - it's how much you took out. Smear PB in intended place with knife, lick knife (carefully!). No extra plates/stuff. Same with hunks of cheese or the like, on scale, tare, cut off some, read the negative.4 -
HoneyBadger302 wrote: »Weighing raw (prior to cooking) is best and the most accurate.
Hello, I have been quietly in the background too shy or not knowing enough to post. But I have been thinking about this very thing a lot. So, this is my chance to ask. In my mind weighing raw gives you more calories than you ingest, if I am wrong please comment. I know it has been written when weighing raw it is mainly for the macros. I really don't care about macros, my main objective is to eat in my calorie range. which is 1339.
I have followed weighing after cooking for over a year. I weigh everything that passes my lips. I'll put my plate on the scale, zero it, then weigh everything, one at a time, write it down then log it. I have logged every day since Nov. 2020 .
I weighed about 272 when I started, lost and gained back in the beginning, but I got over that hump and have been losing consistently. I now weigh 225. I haven't weighed 225 since early 80's
So, when you weigh raw it's going to weigh more than if cooked, which will up the calories for that food. Am I wrong?
Thanks.
0 -
Certainly True. I have a set from Ikea that I use for scooping spices out of my spice pots (I still weight the pots as my spice use can be very calorie heavy) and for measuring liquids for cooking. But I'm constantly annoying that I have to wash them. Which I don't have to when using the scale. Using the scale for me is a very quick affair though. Only takes a few seconds for a complete dish inbetween prepping and cooking. And as my day-time food is typical for my home country (slices of bread with stuff, and muesli) it's even faster.
Maybe I'm missing something (always possible!), but I still had to put my food on something or in something when I weighed it on the scale. I still had to wash a container, unless the food was like an apple that I could put on a napkin.
I say try both and use the method that works best for you. Especially if you have problems losing weight, then by all means use a scale -- eyeballing a tablespoon of peanut butter the wrong way can add a hundred or more calories.
The thread I linked covers that.
Sample: Sandwich. Put plate on scale. Tare/zero. Put bread on plate. Note weight. Tare/Zero, squirt mustard. Note. Tare/zero. Apply first meat/cheese type ingredient. Note. Etc. No extra plates or measuring do-dads.
Jarred things like peanut butter, put jar on scale, lid off. Tare/zero. Scoop some out with knife. Read negative value on scale - it's how much you took out. Smear PB in intended place with knife, lick knife (carefully!). No extra plates/stuff. Same with hunks of cheese or the like, on scale, tare, cut off some, read the negative.
Thanks for that explanation. MFP is full of discussions from people who have problems losing weight -- for people like that, or people who enjoy data and being exact, a food scale would be the way to go.
I would just use the calorie numbers from the bread label instead of taking all those steps. Yes, slices can vary slightly in size, but I didn't have any problems losing weight by reading labels and using cups and spoons. I regularly lost weight and reached goal. We're all different and I didn't see the point of the scale for myself.0 -
Certainly True. I have a set from Ikea that I use for scooping spices out of my spice pots (I still weight the pots as my spice use can be very calorie heavy) and for measuring liquids for cooking. But I'm constantly annoying that I have to wash them. Which I don't have to when using the scale. Using the scale for me is a very quick affair though. Only takes a few seconds for a complete dish inbetween prepping and cooking. And as my day-time food is typical for my home country (slices of bread with stuff, and muesli) it's even faster.
Maybe I'm missing something (always possible!), but I still had to put my food on something or in something when I weighed it on the scale. I still had to wash a container, unless the food was like an apple that I could put on a napkin.
I say try both and use the method that works best for you. Especially if you have problems losing weight, then by all means use a scale -- eyeballing a tablespoon of peanut butter the wrong way can add a hundred or more calories.
The thread I linked covers that.
Sample: Sandwich. Put plate on scale. Tare/zero. Put bread on plate. Note weight. Tare/Zero, squirt mustard. Note. Tare/zero. Apply first meat/cheese type ingredient. Note. Etc. No extra plates or measuring do-dads.
Jarred things like peanut butter, put jar on scale, lid off. Tare/zero. Scoop some out with knife. Read negative value on scale - it's how much you took out. Smear PB in intended place with knife, lick knife (carefully!). No extra plates/stuff. Same with hunks of cheese or the like, on scale, tare, cut off some, read the negative.
Thanks for that explanation. MFP is full of discussions from people who have problems losing weight -- for people like that, or people who enjoy data and being exact, a food scale would be the way to go.
I would just use the calorie numbers from the bread label instead of taking all those steps. Yes, slices can vary slightly in size, but I didn't have any problems losing weight by reading labels and using cups and spoons. I regularly lost weight and reached goal. We're all different and I didn't see the point of the scale for myself.
I wouldn't want to dictate that you should use a scale, personally. (I know some people feel more strongly about that than I do.) If someone is successfully with being more approximate, I think that's great, sincerely.
I was responding only to your "Maybe I'm missing something (always possible!), but I still had to put my food on something or in something when I weighed it on the scale. I still had to wash a container, unless the food was like an apple that I could put on a napkin.", the thing I bolded. The scale, IME, requires fewer dishes, vs. cups/spoons measuring. That's one of the reasons I like it.
If someone's eyeballing or counting items, then sure, there's no dishwashing savings. For something like the peanut butter, which is messy as well as calorie dense, the process of zeroing the scale and counting what I took out - that saves me both time and dishes. If eyeballing, it wouldn't save time at all.
I know this next isn't true for others, but for me, using the scale is also cognitively simpler, happens on autopilot, takes less mindshare, feels less obsessive or oppressive. For me, it would be more annoying to count some things, spoon/cup measure others, eyeball and estimate others, etc. For me, that's too "think-y", fits my style less well than just weighing pretty much everything. 🤷♀️2 -
Certainly True. I have a set from Ikea that I use for scooping spices out of my spice pots (I still weight the pots as my spice use can be very calorie heavy) and for measuring liquids for cooking. But I'm constantly annoying that I have to wash them. Which I don't have to when using the scale. Using the scale for me is a very quick affair though. Only takes a few seconds for a complete dish inbetween prepping and cooking. And as my day-time food is typical for my home country (slices of bread with stuff, and muesli) it's even faster.
Maybe I'm missing something (always possible!), but I still had to put my food on something or in something when I weighed it on the scale. I still had to wash a container, unless the food was like an apple that I could put on a napkin.
I say try both and use the method that works best for you. Especially if you have problems losing weight, then by all means use a scale -- eyeballing a tablespoon of peanut butter the wrong way can add a hundred or more calories.
The thread I linked covers that.
Sample: Sandwich. Put plate on scale. Tare/zero. Put bread on plate. Note weight. Tare/Zero, squirt mustard. Note. Tare/zero. Apply first meat/cheese type ingredient. Note. Etc. No extra plates or measuring do-dads.
Jarred things like peanut butter, put jar on scale, lid off. Tare/zero. Scoop some out with knife. Read negative value on scale - it's how much you took out. Smear PB in intended place with knife, lick knife (carefully!). No extra plates/stuff. Same with hunks of cheese or the like, on scale, tare, cut off some, read the negative.
This. For bread I usually weight the whole loaf when I buy it and divide through the number of slices. Meaning I don't need to weight the single slices anymore as it averages out over the course of a few days. For spices or other things in pots, cheese packs, or other things I put the pot on the scale, tar, take out what I need and note the negative number. I usually do the same with packs of vegetables.
For my morning muesli I put the bowl on the scale, tar, add 40gr of oats, x grams of raisins, tar, add skyr. Cut apple into quarters and weight on the peel side. Grapes or strawberries go on the scale uncut. No need for a cup, bowl, or anything there. Extra time (I just made breakfast) 20 seconds maybe.1 -
HoneyBadger302 wrote: »Weighing raw (prior to cooking) is best and the most accurate.
Hello, I have been quietly in the background too shy or not knowing enough to post. But I have been thinking about this very thing a lot. So, this is my chance to ask. In my mind weighing raw gives you more calories than you ingest, if I am wrong please comment. I know it has been written when weighing raw it is mainly for the macros. I really don't care about macros, my main objective is to eat in my calorie range. which is 1339.
I have followed weighing after cooking for over a year. I weigh everything that passes my lips. I'll put my plate on the scale, zero it, then weigh everything, one at a time, write it down then log it. I have logged every day since Nov. 2020 .
I weighed about 272 when I started, lost and gained back in the beginning, but I got over that hump and have been losing consistently. I now weigh 225. I haven't weighed 225 since early 80's
So, when you weigh raw it's going to weigh more than if cooked, which will up the calories for that food. Am I wrong?
Thanks.
You need to find an entry that is specifically for raw/uncooked/dry weight, but it is FAR more accurate (as a number of other posts above explain, water content being one of the primary factors). Raw vs cooked has no difference in macros.
As you get closer to goal, these differences will become even more important.2 -
@Ann__777 Thanks for the explanation about your weighing method -- that makes sense.
I found weighing to be interesting the few times I tried it, to know exactly how many calories were in my apple or banana, but I didn't have the patience to keep it up.
The OP's original question was which is more accurate, weighing or measuring, so of course the scale would be more accurate.
The scale is one tool in a toolbox and a big help for many people. As I said before, I had no problem losing weight without it. Yes, I knew that my banana might be 10 or 20 calories more, but I didn't gain 35 pounds from missing a few calories from a banana.
I gained the weight by living like a wild person -- eating two bags of potato chips at 750 calories each while ignoring the calories, and on and on. I'm conscious now of my overall lifestyle and value myself more now. But by all means, people should try all the tools available and choose what works best for them.4 -
Obv weighing. The measured disparity in food is insane.0
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
- 426 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