There is SO much items in the database with incorrect nutritional values.

shawngillespie112
shawngillespie112 Posts: 1 Member
in Food and Nutrition
There is so many things in the food database with terribly wrong nutritional values! its crazy. I spent 15 minutes trying to find chicken breast that matched correctly.

it is making it hard for me, and probably a lot of others to trust this website.

these inconsistencies are probably why I am not losing as much weight as I should be.

Replies

  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 9,961 Member
    Here's a post that might help you -- although it's several years old, so ignore the references to asterisks, as MFP doesn't use them anymore.

    https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1234699/logging-accurately-step-by-step-guide/p1
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,876 Member
    shawngillespie112 wrote: »
    There is so many things in the food database with terribly wrong nutritional values! its crazy. I spent 15 minutes trying to find chicken breast that matched correctly.

    it is making it hard for me, and probably a lot of others to trust this website.

    these inconsistencies are probably why I am not losing as much weight as I should be.

    Yeah, the problem is that MFP doesn't populate the database...the database is crowdsourced from other users so you have to vet your entries. It gets easier as you go along and you "frequent" foods list grows. Also, if you're making a recipe, use the recipe builder...don't just select "lasagna" or whatever from the database (unless you're fine with just guessing...which I sometimes was) as it is just some random users recipe and you have no idea what's actually in it.
  • Cheesy567
    Cheesy567 Posts: 1,186 Member
    There’s another, smaller, more accurate database called the USDA database that has all of the main meats, produce, dairy, eggs, etc in it. You can search for chicken breast there, but you’ll still have to pick the correct type as far as raw vs how it’s cooked, skin on vs. skinless, etc. It will just take a minute. The entries there are usually for 3 or 4 ounces or for 100gm. Once you have the one you want, copy the heading (the wordings are precise) and paste it into MFP, and the accurate entry will come up right away in the first one or two entries.

    The website for the USDA database is https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/index.html
  • wilson10102018
    wilson10102018 Posts: 1,306 Member
    All they need to do is automatically cull the lowest 10% of the results of each search term every month based on usage by us into our diaries and the bad results (the least used by us) would drop out of the database. They just don't care that the database is garbage.
  • NYPhotographer2021
    NYPhotographer2021 Posts: 506 Member
    I rarely use the database anymore. I just input my own values so I know it's correct. If I'm in a hurry, I will use the database, but I really try not to.
  • azuki84
    azuki84 Posts: 212 Member
    The foods you buy will mostly have labels. USE those and not what you randomly search for in the database. If it doesnt, use USDA database.
  • wilson10102018
    wilson10102018 Posts: 1,306 Member
    lynn_glenmont wrote: »
    wilson10102018 wrote: »
    All they need to do is automatically cull the lowest 10% of the results of each search term every month based on usage by us into our diaries and the bad results (the least used by us) would drop out of the database. They just don't care that the database is garbage.

    So folks in smaller countries where a particular product has a different formula or the serving size is different will just have to be inconvenienced by needing to recreate foods every month? And quite frankly, I have no confidence that the actual correct items, including the ones imported from the USDA database by MFP originally, will not be caught up in your 10% culling. There's a lot of people on here just logging haphazardly, I believe.

    You didn't notice that I said "each search term." So if some Nigerian is searching for kokoro only the lowest 10% of results for kokoro are removed. Please read my posts more carefully. I usually say what I mean.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 9,961 Member
    wilson10102018 wrote: »
    lynn_glenmont wrote: »
    wilson10102018 wrote: »
    All they need to do is automatically cull the lowest 10% of the results of each search term every "month based on usage by us into our diaries and the bad results (the least used by us) would drop out of the database. They just don't care that the database is garbage.

    So folks in smaller countries where a particular product has a different formula or the serving size is different will just have to be inconvenienced by needing to recreate foods every month? And quite frankly, I have no confidence that the actual correct items, including the ones imported from the USDA database by MFP originally, will not be caught up in your 10% culling. There's a lot of people on here just logging haphazardly, I believe.

    You didn't notice that I said "each search term." So if some Nigerian is searching for kokoro only the lowest 10% of results for kokoro are removed. Please read my posts more carefully. I usually say what I mean.

    No, I saw that. I have zero confidence that the bottom 10% of "eggs" or bottom 10% of "Cracker Barrel sharp cheddar mac and cheese" etc. don't include the "good" entries that are actually correct. I frequently have to check a dozen or more entries for a search term, rejecting many that are "green checked," to find one that is actually correct (or at least close enough that I give up and use it). So every month I would have to recreate entries for items that have been deleted.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,897 Member
    Unfortunately, the 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. A green check mark for USER-created entries just means enough people have upvoted the entry - it is not necessarily correct.

    To find ADMIN entries for whole foods, I get the syntax from the USDA database and paste that into MFP. All ADMIN entries from the USDA will have weights as an option BUT there is a glitch whereby sometimes 1g is the option but the values are actually for 100g. This is pretty easy to spot though, as when added the calories are 100x more than is reasonable.

    https://fdc.nal.usda.gov

    Use the “SR Legacy” tab - that seems to be what MFP used to pull in entries.

    For cooked chicken breast: "chicken, breast, cooked, roasted" gave me https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/?query=chicken, breast, cooked and from that you can see the syntax for the MFP entry to use is "Chicken, broilers or fryers, breast, meat only, cooked, roasted"

    Note: any MFP entry that includes "USDA" was USER entered.

    For packaged foods, I verify the label against what I find in MFP. (Alas, you cannot just scan with your phone and assume what you get is correct.)
  • gpanda103
    gpanda103 Posts: 189 Member
    USDA food database is a great resource.

    Also, with stuff like chicken (and produce), they are always going to have different nutrition. Some chickens may be more lean than others, different farms feed them different foods, etc. It’s the same reason why different brands of beans will have different nutrition, as they get harvested at different times and grow in different soils. Worst case scenario, just make your own custom food.. even though it’s down right now :(
  • pcrozier99
    pcrozier99 Posts: 35 Member
    Looking outside the app's database for clarifying information is sometimes helpful and necessary when there is disparity in the database. If you are eating whole foods, it's pretty easy to find reliable information in other places.
  • claireychn074
    claireychn074 Posts: 1,329 Member
    Well if the bug isn’t fixed we might not have a database of foods…!

Categories