How US labeling is decieving

Options

Replies

• Posts: 9,990 Member
Options
nossmf wrote: »
Please note that he said the "entire can" is 900 calories, not a single 5-second spray. So, work the math a bit more...

400 servings x 0.3 seconds per serving = 120 seconds of spray per can
900 calories per can / 120 seconds per can = 7.5 calories per second sprayed

So in your example, @neanderthin, of 3-4 seconds spray, you would have sprayed out roughly 30 calories. Your example perfectly illustrates how only a portion of your food comes into contact with the spray, therefore your actual consumption of spray-calories is quite low. But I just wanted to point out that @ninerbuff's and your posts were not in conflict.

Also, even where the food is in contact with the fat, when you're done cooking, there will still generally be a film of fat on the pan. So even where there is contact, the food is not picking up all the fat.

I'm no apologists for oil spray cans. To me, they seem harder to clean than if I oil the pan the old-fashioned way, and they seem more prone to leaving those brown stains on my pan. Plus they're much more expensive, and as far as I can tell, the containers can't be recycled yet.
• Posts: 24 Member
Options
Don’t worry it’s not all oil in those sprays there is kerosene as well.
• Posts: 9,974 Member
edited July 2023
Options
ninerbuff wrote: »
None of this logic makes sense and it's still 6g's of fat which is simply calculated as part of total fat consumed, easy peasy. Not sure where you got the idea that a portion of food has to have 20% or less of fat.
• 1 oz Cheddar 70% fat
• 100 g's salmon 75% fat
• 1 oz Chocolate 55% fat

Look at Jennie O Lean ground Turkey for example.

1 serving is 170 calories
8 grams of fat per serving

So 42% of that serving is fat

Doesn't sound that lean to me.

Point being that labeling can confuse people. Luckily we do have an app here that does count our total fat and calories. Again, I'm not disparaging against fat, just about how labeling can be deceptive to those that DON'T understand why they aren't losing weight even though they are reading labels.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Yeah, I really don't know what to tell you niner. When you say lean, are you saying too much fat in a particular food item is a bad thing in general? What about the avocado with 80%, that's got to freak you out, no? especially considering there's no label to tell people the fat content so do you think nature made a mistake there, or chocolate, chocolate has a lot of fat and a lot of saturated fat, so potentially causes atherosclerosis, do you think nature made a mistake there as well. I'm just not sure what your trying to say. The losing weight part is about total fat grams in a diet, not the percentage of fat in an item to be able to calculate weight loss. cheers
• Posts: 48,598 Member
Options
ninerbuff wrote: »
None of this logic makes sense and it's still 6g's of fat which is simply calculated as part of total fat consumed, easy peasy. Not sure where you got the idea that a portion of food has to have 20% or less of fat.
• 1 oz Cheddar 70% fat
• 100 g's salmon 75% fat
• 1 oz Chocolate 55% fat

Look at Jennie O Lean ground Turkey for example.

1 serving is 170 calories
8 grams of fat per serving

So 42% of that serving is fat

Doesn't sound that lean to me.

Point being that labeling can confuse people. Luckily we do have an app here that does count our total fat and calories. Again, I'm not disparaging against fat, just about how labeling can be deceptive to those that DON'T understand why they aren't losing weight even though they are reading labels.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

re the bolded, the food gives the calories, 170. That is what is needed for weight loss so it is not deceptive.

If someone is tracking macros for nutrition or medical reasons that is stated in grams for all to see. The maths, if needed, is not difficult.

Would you prefer it if they gave the ?grams or ?oz = ?cals and do a percentage breakdown on the label?

The only macro I’ve ever counted is protein, by the gram not calorie.
We generally advise people by the gram for macros, not how many calories per lbs of lean body weight.

I aim for 80-100g protein, not 320-400cals.

Sorry, I think I’m either missing your point, or over/under thinking it Niner,

Cheers, h.
The science behind weight loss, although it does really come down to calories, is that the body can only absorb macros in limited amounts. You can only absorb so much protein at one time, same with fat etc. If the fat you consume isn't being utilized for energy, then it's stored. So it DOES matter how much fat you have in a meal regardless of calories. Realize that if you're taking calories excessively in one macronutrient, that means you're limiting it from another if you're counting calories. TEF also comes into play on this because fat doesn't need a lot of energy to metabolize like protein does. People eating Jennie O lean turkey may think they are eating a low fat meat when that's not entirely true based on the labeling.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

• Posts: 48,598 Member
Options
ninerbuff wrote: »
None of this logic makes sense and it's still 6g's of fat which is simply calculated as part of total fat consumed, easy peasy. Not sure where you got the idea that a portion of food has to have 20% or less of fat.
• 1 oz Cheddar 70% fat
• 100 g's salmon 75% fat
• 1 oz Chocolate 55% fat

Look at Jennie O Lean ground Turkey for example.

1 serving is 170 calories
8 grams of fat per serving

So 42% of that serving is fat

Doesn't sound that lean to me.

Point being that labeling can confuse people. Luckily we do have an app here that does count our total fat and calories. Again, I'm not disparaging against fat, just about how labeling can be deceptive to those that DON'T understand why they aren't losing weight even though they are reading labels.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Yeah, I really don't know what to tell you niner. When you say lean, are you saying too much fat in a particular food item is a bad thing in general? What about the avocado with 80%, that's got to freak you out, no? especially considering there's no label to tell people the fat content so do you think nature made a mistake there, or chocolate, chocolate has a lot of fat and a lot of saturated fat, so potentially causes atherosclerosis, do you think nature made a mistake there as well. I'm just not sure what your trying to say. The losing weight part is about total fat grams in a diet, not the percentage of fat in an item to be able to calculate weight loss. cheers
How much fat you consume does matter. As I mentioned before, someone new may not realize that a protein they are consuming may have more fat than advertised by saying it's "lean". Therefore it's deception. You know as well as I do that just because something labeled as fat free doesn't mean you can eat loads of it and the same with low carb. And while counting calories is the main objective to lose weight, the right splits in macros DOES make a difference is how the body reacts to usage of the energy taken in. Any athlete will tell you that eating carbs vs just doing keto will affect their performance.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

• Posts: 1,229 Member
Options
Don’t worry it’s not all oil in those sprays there is kerosene as well.

Depends on the particular brand. There are several types on the market now that just use compressed air as the propellant.
• Posts: 9,974 Member
edited July 2023
Options
ninerbuff wrote: »
ninerbuff wrote: »
None of this logic makes sense and it's still 6g's of fat which is simply calculated as part of total fat consumed, easy peasy. Not sure where you got the idea that a portion of food has to have 20% or less of fat.
• 1 oz Cheddar 70% fat
• 100 g's salmon 75% fat
• 1 oz Chocolate 55% fat

Look at Jennie O Lean ground Turkey for example.

1 serving is 170 calories
8 grams of fat per serving

So 42% of that serving is fat

Doesn't sound that lean to me.

Point being that labeling can confuse people. Luckily we do have an app here that does count our total fat and calories. Again, I'm not disparaging against fat, just about how labeling can be deceptive to those that DON'T understand why they aren't losing weight even though they are reading labels.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Yeah, I really don't know what to tell you niner. When you say lean, are you saying too much fat in a particular food item is a bad thing in general? What about the avocado with 80%, that's got to freak you out, no? especially considering there's no label to tell people the fat content so do you think nature made a mistake there, or chocolate, chocolate has a lot of fat and a lot of saturated fat, so potentially causes atherosclerosis, do you think nature made a mistake there as well. I'm just not sure what your trying to say. The losing weight part is about total fat grams in a diet, not the percentage of fat in an item to be able to calculate weight loss. cheers
How much fat you consume does matter. As I mentioned before, someone new may not realize that a protein they are consuming may have more fat than advertised by saying it's "lean". Therefore it's deception. You know as well as I do that just because something labeled as fat free doesn't mean you can eat loads of it and the same with low carb. And while counting calories is the main objective to lose weight, the right splits in macros DOES make a difference is how the body reacts to usage of the energy taken in. Any athlete will tell you that eating carbs vs just doing keto will affect their performance.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

But we do know how much fat we're consuming, it said 8g's. For macro's a person needs to know total grams for each and not specifically that a particular food might have 42% fat by weight.Those totals are also the metrics that have always been used for counting calories. Also it's not deceptive that they don't show the percentages of fat by weight simply because they are telling us there's 8 total grams of fat in that portion, which like I said is what we use to figure out our total fat intake which then can be translated into any particular macro split we want. You've mentioned that 42% fat in that lean ground turkey is more than you thought and was quite high, so do you think that 8g's of fat in a particular protein portion is high? just curious. I really don't know what else to say, except, keep being inquisitive and wanting to increase your knowledge of nutrition, it's all good. Cheers
• Posts: 48,598 Member
Options
ninerbuff wrote: »
ninerbuff wrote: »
None of this logic makes sense and it's still 6g's of fat which is simply calculated as part of total fat consumed, easy peasy. Not sure where you got the idea that a portion of food has to have 20% or less of fat.
• 1 oz Cheddar 70% fat
• 100 g's salmon 75% fat
• 1 oz Chocolate 55% fat

Look at Jennie O Lean ground Turkey for example.

1 serving is 170 calories
8 grams of fat per serving

So 42% of that serving is fat

Doesn't sound that lean to me.

Point being that labeling can confuse people. Luckily we do have an app here that does count our total fat and calories. Again, I'm not disparaging against fat, just about how labeling can be deceptive to those that DON'T understand why they aren't losing weight even though they are reading labels.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Yeah, I really don't know what to tell you niner. When you say lean, are you saying too much fat in a particular food item is a bad thing in general? What about the avocado with 80%, that's got to freak you out, no? especially considering there's no label to tell people the fat content so do you think nature made a mistake there, or chocolate, chocolate has a lot of fat and a lot of saturated fat, so potentially causes atherosclerosis, do you think nature made a mistake there as well. I'm just not sure what your trying to say. The losing weight part is about total fat grams in a diet, not the percentage of fat in an item to be able to calculate weight loss. cheers
How much fat you consume does matter. As I mentioned before, someone new may not realize that a protein they are consuming may have more fat than advertised by saying it's "lean". Therefore it's deception. You know as well as I do that just because something labeled as fat free doesn't mean you can eat loads of it and the same with low carb. And while counting calories is the main objective to lose weight, the right splits in macros DOES make a difference is how the body reacts to usage of the energy taken in. Any athlete will tell you that eating carbs vs just doing keto will affect their performance.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

But we do know how much fat we're consuming, it said 8g's. For macro's a person needs to know total grams for each and not specifically that a particular food might have 42% fat by weight.Those totals are also the metrics that have always been used for counting calories. Also it's not deceptive that they don't show the percentages of fat by weight simply because they are telling us there's 8 total grams of fat in that portion, which like I said is what we use to figure out our total fat intake which then can be translated into any particular macro split we want. You've mentioned that 42% fat in that lean ground turkey is more than you thought and was quite high, so do you think that 8g's of fat in a particular protein portion is high? just curious. I really don't know what else to say, except, keep being inquisitive and wanting to increase your knowledge of nutrition, it's all good. Cheers
Queston: If it's 42% fat, should it be called lean?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

• Posts: 48,598 Member
edited July 2023
Options
https://www.nutritionix.com/food/90-percent-lean-ground-beef

so 1serving is 196 calories

10 grams of fat x 9 is 90 calories

Divided by 196 that's 45% fat calories out of that 196

Explain how it's 90% lean

To the average person if they were counting calories, they'd look at 196 calories in a serving an believe based on labeling that there's only 19 calories of fat in that serving because it's "90%" lean right?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

• Posts: 9,974 Member
edited July 2023
Options
This example is talking about fat by weight and not percentage which there are no products that list fat or any macro by percentage anyway, and only g's. Basically 90% lean is saying that the fat content is 10% by weight and that portion is 85g/10% they rounded it up to 10. Again a consumer will look at the total fat content which clearly shows 10g's could someone somehow believe that portion was 19 calories, I guess it's possible, anything is possible. I would think if they knew that there's 9 calories in a gram of fat and was someone that was actually counting calories and they clearly saw 10 grams, then totally disregarded that and then assumed it was 19 calories, that is a bit of a stretch imo

In Canada we use a different metric. We have extra lean which is 10% maximum fat by weight, lean which is 17%, medium which is 23 and regular which is 30% by weight. The total fat is what shows on the nutritional label.
• Posts: 48,598 Member
Options
This example is talking about fat by weight and not percentage which there are no products that list fat or any macro by percentage anyway, and only g's. Basically 90% lean is saying that the fat content is 10% by weight and that portion is 85g/10% they rounded it up to 10. Again a consumer will look at the total fat content which clearly shows 10g's could someone somehow believe that portion was 19.6 calories, I guess it possible, anything is possible.

In Canada we use a different metric. We have extra lean which is 10% maximum fat by weight, lean which is 17%, medium which is 23 and regular which is 30% by weight. The total fat is what shows on the nutritional label.
Just saying that to an untrained eye and people who don't turn labels over to inspect them, would look at that labeling and BELIEVE that what they are buying is 90% lean mean when someone like you and I would know that it's not. On meats that are cut in store and packaged by the cutters, there is no labeling other than what kind of cut it is and weight.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

• Posts: 1,531 Member
edited July 2023
Options
Look at how this is misleading:

https://www.heb.com/product-detail/h-e-b-ground-beef-93-lean-1-lb/1265400

It's a 1lb package. Serving size listed as 4oz. Macros are listed as 8g fat, 23g protein, etc.

Oh wait, let me get my calculator out, because they've deliberately mismatched imperial and metric to obfuscate it.

The calculator tells me 4oz is 113.4g, so that 8g fat is indeed 7% of weight as fat, and 42% of calories. They shouldn't mismatch imperial and metric like that.

Same goes for their milk. It's listed as gallons, with serving size in cups, and macros per serving in grams. I never thought 1% milk meant 1% of calories were fat, I hadn't given much thought to it tbh, I just know it's lower fat than 2%, but I also never thought it was as high as 22.5% calories from fat.
• Posts: 9,974 Member
edited July 2023
Options
Queston: If it's 42% fat, should it be called lean

You didn't answer my question which was; do you think 8g's of fat is high for a portion of protein?

Niner I've never taken any descriptive of a food product seriously and only look at the nutritional labeling, otherwise I would be lead to believe quite a bit of nonsense that is prevalent in the food industry, especially the healthy labels, funny stuff really.
• Posts: 9,990 Member
edited July 2023
Options
ninerbuff wrote: »
https://www.nutritionix.com/food/90-percent-lean-ground-beef

so 1serving is 196 calories

10 grams of fat x 9 is 90 calories

Divided by 196 that's 45% fat calories out of that 196

Explain how it's 90% lean

To the average person if they were counting calories, they'd look at 196 calories in a serving an believe based on labeling that there's only 19 calories of fat in that serving because it's "90%" lean right?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

It's 90% lean by weight. I don't understand this hypothetical person looking at a label that lists the grams of fat and, instead of reading the information staring them in the face, opting to look at the calories and do math based on a claim of X% lean.
• Posts: 48,598 Member
Options
ninerbuff wrote: »
ninerbuff wrote: »
ninerbuff wrote: »
None of this logic makes sense and it's still 6g's of fat which is simply calculated as part of total fat consumed, easy peasy. Not sure where you got the idea that a portion of food has to have 20% or less of fat.
• 1 oz Cheddar 70% fat
• 100 g's salmon 75% fat
• 1 oz Chocolate 55% fat

Look at Jennie O Lean ground Turkey for example.

1 serving is 170 calories
8 grams of fat per serving

So 42% of that serving is fat

Doesn't sound that lean to me.

Point being that labeling can confuse people. Luckily we do have an app here that does count our total fat and calories. Again, I'm not disparaging against fat, just about how labeling can be deceptive to those that DON'T understand why they aren't losing weight even though they are reading labels.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Yeah, I really don't know what to tell you niner. When you say lean, are you saying too much fat in a particular food item is a bad thing in general? What about the avocado with 80%, that's got to freak you out, no? especially considering there's no label to tell people the fat content so do you think nature made a mistake there, or chocolate, chocolate has a lot of fat and a lot of saturated fat, so potentially causes atherosclerosis, do you think nature made a mistake there as well. I'm just not sure what your trying to say. The losing weight part is about total fat grams in a diet, not the percentage of fat in an item to be able to calculate weight loss. cheers
How much fat you consume does matter. As I mentioned before, someone new may not realize that a protein they are consuming may have more fat than advertised by saying it's "lean". Therefore it's deception. You know as well as I do that just because something labeled as fat free doesn't mean you can eat loads of it and the same with low carb. And while counting calories is the main objective to lose weight, the right splits in macros DOES make a difference is how the body reacts to usage of the energy taken in. Any athlete will tell you that eating carbs vs just doing keto will affect their performance.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

But we do know how much fat we're consuming, it said 8g's. For macro's a person needs to know total grams for each and not specifically that a particular food might have 42% fat by weight.Those totals are also the metrics that have always been used for counting calories. Also it's not deceptive that they don't show the percentages of fat by weight simply because they are telling us there's 8 total grams of fat in that portion, which like I said is what we use to figure out our total fat intake which then can be translated into any particular macro split we want. You've mentioned that 42% fat in that lean ground turkey is more than you thought and was quite high, so do you think that 8g's of fat in a particular protein portion is high? just curious. I really don't know what else to say, except, keep being inquisitive and wanting to increase your knowledge of nutrition, it's all good. Cheers
Queston:
If it's 42% fat, should it be called lean?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

You didn't answer my question which was; do you think 8g's of fat is high for a portion of protein?

Niner I've never taken any descriptive of a food product seriously and only look at the nutritional labeling, otherwise I would be lead to believe quite a bit of nonsense that is prevalent in the food industry, especially the healthy labels, funny stuff really.
Depends on the portion of protein relative the 8g of fat. I personally believe if it's over 20% in fat, it's too high.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

• Posts: 48,598 Member
Options
ninerbuff wrote: »
https://www.nutritionix.com/food/90-percent-lean-ground-beef

so 1serving is 196 calories

10 grams of fat x 9 is 90 calories

Divided by 196 that's 45% fat calories out of that 196

Explain how it's 90% lean

To the average person if they were counting calories, they'd look at 196 calories in a serving an believe based on labeling that there's only 19 calories of fat in that serving because it's "90%" lean right?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

It's 90% lean by weight. I don't understand this hypothetical person looking at a label that lists the grams of fat and, instead of reading the information staring them in the face, opting to look at the calories and do math based on a claim of X% lean.
Packages don't say 90% lean by weight. It just says, 90% lean. Now at face value, what do you think the average consumer thinks?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

• Posts: 1,531 Member
edited July 2023
Options
It's 90% lean by weight. I don't understand this hypothetical person looking at a label that lists the grams of fat and, instead of reading the information staring them in the face, opting to look at the calories and do math based on a claim of X% lean.
10% fat by weight. As ninerbuff said, the package doesn't specify the % refers to weight.
45% fat by calories, which is ultimately what matters, and it's what people track (if they are tracking their diet), and it's also what's shown on labels as "% of a daily diet".

Wouldn't it make more sense therefore to package it as "55% lean"? But that probably wouldn't sell as well, would it?
• Posts: 9,974 Member
Options
ninerbuff wrote: »
ninerbuff wrote: »
ninerbuff wrote: »
ninerbuff wrote: »
None of this logic makes sense and it's still 6g's of fat which is simply calculated as part of total fat consumed, easy peasy. Not sure where you got the idea that a portion of food has to have 20% or less of fat.
• 1 oz Cheddar 70% fat
• 100 g's salmon 75% fat
• 1 oz Chocolate 55% fat

Look at Jennie O Lean ground Turkey for example.

1 serving is 170 calories
8 grams of fat per serving

So 42% of that serving is fat

Doesn't sound that lean to me.

Point being that labeling can confuse people. Luckily we do have an app here that does count our total fat and calories. Again, I'm not disparaging against fat, just about how labeling can be deceptive to those that DON'T understand why they aren't losing weight even though they are reading labels.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Yeah, I really don't know what to tell you niner. When you say lean, are you saying too much fat in a particular food item is a bad thing in general? What about the avocado with 80%, that's got to freak you out, no? especially considering there's no label to tell people the fat content so do you think nature made a mistake there, or chocolate, chocolate has a lot of fat and a lot of saturated fat, so potentially causes atherosclerosis, do you think nature made a mistake there as well. I'm just not sure what your trying to say. The losing weight part is about total fat grams in a diet, not the percentage of fat in an item to be able to calculate weight loss. cheers
How much fat you consume does matter. As I mentioned before, someone new may not realize that a protein they are consuming may have more fat than advertised by saying it's "lean". Therefore it's deception. You know as well as I do that just because something labeled as fat free doesn't mean you can eat loads of it and the same with low carb. And while counting calories is the main objective to lose weight, the right splits in macros DOES make a difference is how the body reacts to usage of the energy taken in. Any athlete will tell you that eating carbs vs just doing keto will affect their performance.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

But we do know how much fat we're consuming, it said 8g's. For macro's a person needs to know total grams for each and not specifically that a particular food might have 42% fat by weight.Those totals are also the metrics that have always been used for counting calories. Also it's not deceptive that they don't show the percentages of fat by weight simply because they are telling us there's 8 total grams of fat in that portion, which like I said is what we use to figure out our total fat intake which then can be translated into any particular macro split we want. You've mentioned that 42% fat in that lean ground turkey is more than you thought and was quite high, so do you think that 8g's of fat in a particular protein portion is high? just curious. I really don't know what else to say, except, keep being inquisitive and wanting to increase your knowledge of nutrition, it's all good. Cheers
Queston:
If it's 42% fat, should it be called lean?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

You didn't answer my question which was; do you think 8g's of fat is high for a portion of protein?

Niner I've never taken any descriptive of a food product seriously and only look at the nutritional labeling, otherwise I would be lead to believe quite a bit of nonsense that is prevalent in the food industry, especially the healthy labels, funny stuff really.
Depends on the portion of protein relative the 8g of fat. I personally believe if it's over 20% in fat, it's too high.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Well, that leaves out eggs and unless it's fat free, no dairy as well, so that leaves vegan, with limitations. Are you vegan?
• Posts: 32,442 Member
Options
Like others who've posted - if I'm reading between their lines accurately - I don't understand why you're as excited about this as you seem to be.

Lucky Charms aren't actually lucky. How would the average consumer know that? That's an exaggeration, but IMO you're getting close to that level of argument here.
ninerbuff wrote: »
ninerbuff wrote: »
https://www.nutritionix.com/food/90-percent-lean-ground-beef

so 1serving is 196 calories

10 grams of fat x 9 is 90 calories

Divided by 196 that's 45% fat calories out of that 196

Explain how it's 90% lean

To the average person if they were counting calories, they'd look at 196 calories in a serving an believe based on labeling that there's only 19 calories of fat in that serving because it's "90%" lean right?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

It's 90% lean by weight. I don't understand this hypothetical person looking at a label that lists the grams of fat and, instead of reading the information staring them in the face, opting to look at the calories and do math based on a claim of X% lean.
Packages don't say 90% lean by weight. It just says, 90% lean. Now at face value, what do you think the average consumer thinks?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

I think the average consumer doesn't give a rat's patootie. People who are serious about weight management or nutrition tend to study those subjects, and can readily get the information they need from most labels.

Yes, sometimes it requires a little arithmetic . . . whoohoo. Yes, many people are bad at math, but that worries me more (at the population level) in other realms, like retirement savings, mortgage selection, etc.

In world where all kinds of blogosphere nonsense is telling the average consumer pure counterproductive mythology, I don't think the things you're saying about labels are the biggest practical barrier to weight management or nutrition improvement for anyone.

People who don't make a study of this stuff, but have common sense, know that marketers aren't to be trusted, and aren't consciously making decisions based on the "lean" in "lean ground turkey", any more than they believe the "lucky" in "Lucky Charms".
ninerbuff wrote: »
ninerbuff wrote: »
ninerbuff wrote: »
ninerbuff wrote: »
None of this logic makes sense and it's still 6g's of fat which is simply calculated as part of total fat consumed, easy peasy. Not sure where you got the idea that a portion of food has to have 20% or less of fat.
• 1 oz Cheddar 70% fat
• 100 g's salmon 75% fat
• 1 oz Chocolate 55% fat

Look at Jennie O Lean ground Turkey for example.

1 serving is 170 calories
8 grams of fat per serving

So 42% of that serving is fat

Doesn't sound that lean to me.

Point being that labeling can confuse people. Luckily we do have an app here that does count our total fat and calories. Again, I'm not disparaging against fat, just about how labeling can be deceptive to those that DON'T understand why they aren't losing weight even though they are reading labels.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Yeah, I really don't know what to tell you niner. When you say lean, are you saying too much fat in a particular food item is a bad thing in general? What about the avocado with 80%, that's got to freak you out, no? especially considering there's no label to tell people the fat content so do you think nature made a mistake there, or chocolate, chocolate has a lot of fat and a lot of saturated fat, so potentially causes atherosclerosis, do you think nature made a mistake there as well. I'm just not sure what your trying to say. The losing weight part is about total fat grams in a diet, not the percentage of fat in an item to be able to calculate weight loss. cheers
How much fat you consume does matter. As I mentioned before, someone new may not realize that a protein they are consuming may have more fat than advertised by saying it's "lean". Therefore it's deception. You know as well as I do that just because something labeled as fat free doesn't mean you can eat loads of it and the same with low carb. And while counting calories is the main objective to lose weight, the right splits in macros DOES make a difference is how the body reacts to usage of the energy taken in. Any athlete will tell you that eating carbs vs just doing keto will affect their performance.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

But we do know how much fat we're consuming, it said 8g's. For macro's a person needs to know total grams for each and not specifically that a particular food might have 42% fat by weight.Those totals are also the metrics that have always been used for counting calories. Also it's not deceptive that they don't show the percentages of fat by weight simply because they are telling us there's 8 total grams of fat in that portion, which like I said is what we use to figure out our total fat intake which then can be translated into any particular macro split we want. You've mentioned that 42% fat in that lean ground turkey is more than you thought and was quite high, so do you think that 8g's of fat in a particular protein portion is high? just curious. I really don't know what else to say, except, keep being inquisitive and wanting to increase your knowledge of nutrition, it's all good. Cheers
Queston:
If it's 42% fat, should it be called lean?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

You didn't answer my question which was; do you think 8g's of fat is high for a portion of protein?

Niner I've never taken any descriptive of a food product seriously and only look at the nutritional labeling, otherwise I would be lead to believe quite a bit of nonsense that is prevalent in the food industry, especially the healthy labels, funny stuff really.
Depends on the portion of protein relative the 8g of fat. I personally believe if it's over 20% in fat, it's too high.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Why 20%? MFP's default fat goal is 30%.

(Note to those inclined to argue with that last statement: I'm just poking at the style of argumentation in this thread, basically joking.)

If you ask me, it's the overall nutrition of a total diet, averaged over a day or few, that counts. I admit I rough-evaluate new potential vegetarian protein source foods based on protein gram/calorie ratio as one factor. But as long as I get a reasonable fat minimum most of the time, I don't see why the fat to protein ratio of a single food matters. (Maybe that's because I don't eat meat?)
• Posts: 9,376 Member
Options
Wrong target audience in this discussion, IMHO. People posting here in MFP are dedicated to improving their diet, whether to lose weight or to gain muscle. We are far more inclined to actually do the math, inspect the claims, see how a given food item correlates into our desired diet.

The average person is likely to be less informed, less curious, or less caring. They certainly won't be pulling out a calculator to determine the truth of an item's nutritional value. If they care at all, they will simply look at two packages of an item and be inclined to take the one which sounds like it promises to be "better." One package claims "90% lean" and the other says "55% calories protein". We've established above they are mathematically the same. But the average consumer is going to grab the first package.

And let's be honest, given the obesity pandemic at large, "average" consumers far outnumber people who take the time/effort to do the math people in this thread keep saying is "easy."