Food logging: are USDA foods the same in every country

anxietyfairy
anxietyfairy Posts: 37 Member
in Getting Started
Like, if I ate an apple in New Zealand, would one from America have a similar profile? calories? nutrition?

Replies

  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,265 Member
    edited September 29
    Yes pretty much. Fruit or any whole food with a goal of getting down to exactitudes like calories, then no, it's a best guess type of deal and that includes the info from agencies like the USDA, those are also a best guess scenario. Although people will try to be precise and exact, it's just always going to be close and most aren't very close apparently but do your best if calories are an integral part of your life, for me they aren't.
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,458 Member
    Well, a couple things about American apples. I live in a big apple producing state, so it is interesting to me.

    I'm an older person and I remember apples being a lot different when I was young.

    For one thing, they're HUGE here now. I mean, if you really look you can find smaller apples, but for the most part they're nearly the size of a baseball now. Size matters with calories.

    The other thing is the proliferation of super sweet varieties like Sweet Tango, HoneyCrisp, and similar. Sugar matters with calories.

    So like neanderthin it's never exact.

    Definitely weigh them, that's part you can control. I rarely eat more than a half a large apple in one day.
  • sollyn23l2
    sollyn23l2 Posts: 1,788 Member
    anxietyfairy wrote: »
    Like, if I ate an apple in New Zealand, would one from America have a similar profile? calories? nutrition?

    Every single apple you eat will have a slightly different nutrition profile. Every single steak you eat will have a different nutritional profile. Every single watermelon you eat will have a somewhat different nutritional profile. The listing's are just generalizations. Many of the regulars on here make it out as an exact science and make it sound like you can calculate calories to the exact calorie. You cannot. What matters is that by tracking it, you can give yourself a roughly general idea over days, weeks, months, years how much you are eating. I have fallen down the rabbit hole of trying to track my nutrition intake (calories, macros, vitamins, minerals) to the exact amount. It will drive you insane. It's important to understand that you will never exactly know, and that's ok.
  • anxietyfairy
    anxietyfairy Posts: 37 Member
    Thanks everyone! very helpful
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,265 Member
    edited September 30
    Getting away from the apple question there is a vast difference from acceptable US foods compared to the EU or many other Countries and it's mostly because of the influence of different actors that lobby the gov't in the US. Food industry lobbyists often advocate for policies that benefit their interests, which can sometimes lead to differences in food safety standards compared to other countries.
  • lesdarts180
    lesdarts180 Posts: 3,105 Member
    A few months ago I had debate with another MFP user about the nutritional values in avocado.
    I looked up the USDA database and compared it with what I was seeing on labels here in the UK. (Single fruits are sold without labels but often packs of two avocados can be found in supermarkets and they are labelled)
    It turns out that the USDA database has 3 entries - Florida, California and an average.
    However, here in the UK our avocados mainly come from South America.
    Different growing conditions create different nutritional profiles.

    Avocado is relatively high in calories for a fruit/vegetable so it might be worth checking out your local variety. Apples are relatively low calorie - not worth worrying about.
    Choose your battles.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,097 Member
    lesdarts180 wrote: »
    A few months ago I had debate with another MFP user about the nutritional values in avocado.
    I looked up the USDA database and compared it with what I was seeing on labels here in the UK. (Single fruits are sold without labels but often packs of two avocados can be found in supermarkets and they are labelled)
    It turns out that the USDA database has 3 entries - Florida, California and an average.
    However, here in the UK our avocados mainly come from South America.
    Different growing conditions create different nutritional profiles.

    Avocado is relatively high in calories for a fruit/vegetable so it might be worth checking out your local variety. Apples are relatively low calorie - not worth worrying about.
    Choose your battles.

    What are called Florida and California avocados in the U.S. are actually two different varieties of avocado -- it's not a "growing conditions" issue. Florida avocados are larger with smooth, bright green skin. California (Haas) avocados are smaller with bumpy, dark green or black/purple skin. Based on moith feel, it seems to me Florida avocados have a higher percentage of fat.

    For the apples, OP, don't worry about it. I'd be more concerned about getting country-specific data entries for meat, as there could be much more significant variations both in the overall marbling in animals raised for different market and in how much fat is included in various cuts.

    Also, the variation between apples is not as great as some here seem to imply. The USDA info is based on averages of samples of fruit, not "generalizations." If calorie counting doesn't work for you, it's highly unlikely that the problem is that your apples are deviating significantly from the averages.
  • lesdarts180
    lesdarts180 Posts: 3,105 Member
    @lynn_glenmont , thanks for the clarification. I don't know what variety of avocados we get here in the UK but the labels indicate a noticeable difference from both the Florida and Californian varieties. As they come from South America I assumed the difference was growing conditions but anyway, it's worth checking locally.
  • sollyn23l2
    sollyn23l2 Posts: 1,788 Member
    edited October 6
    lesdarts180 wrote: »
    @lynn_glenmont , thanks for the clarification. I don't know what variety of avocados we get here in the UK but the labels indicate a noticeable difference from both the Florida and Californian varieties. As they come from South America I assumed the difference was growing conditions but anyway, it's worth checking locally.

    Do they have a darker green skin or a light green skin? Dark green would be "hass" or California avocados. Light green would be Florida avocados. You should,be fine regardless of which kind you use to lig as long as you log by weight.
  • Alatariel75
    Alatariel75 Posts: 18,341 Member
    lynn_glenmont wrote: »
    lesdarts180 wrote: »
    A few months ago I had debate with another MFP user about the nutritional values in avocado.
    I looked up the USDA database and compared it with what I was seeing on labels here in the UK. (Single fruits are sold without labels but often packs of two avocados can be found in supermarkets and they are labelled)
    It turns out that the USDA database has 3 entries - Florida, California and an average.
    However, here in the UK our avocados mainly come from South America.
    Different growing conditions create different nutritional profiles.

    Avocado is relatively high in calories for a fruit/vegetable so it might be worth checking out your local variety. Apples are relatively low calorie - not worth worrying about.
    Choose your battles.

    What are called Florida and California avocados in the U.S. are actually two different varieties of avocado -- it's not a "growing conditions" issue. Florida avocados are larger with smooth, bright green skin. California (Haas) avocados are smaller with bumpy, dark green or black/purple skin. Based on moith feel, it seems to me Florida avocados have a higher percentage of fat.

    For the apples, OP, don't worry about it. I'd be more concerned about getting country-specific data entries for meat, as there could be much more significant variations both in the overall marbling in animals raised for different market and in how much fat is included in various cuts.

    Also, the variation between apples is not as great as some here seem to imply. The USDA info is based on averages of samples of fruit, not "generalizations." If calorie counting doesn't work for you, it's highly unlikely that the problem is that your apples are deviating significantly from the averages.

    The differences between area, breed, way they're raised etc has an enormous effect on the nutritional info of meat. Especially with the popularity of waygu and the like these days, with really high marble scores. I laughed to see an entry "Wagyu Beef Tenderloin, marble score 9, separable lean only, raw." like... at a marble score of 9, there's no such thing as separable lean...

  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 9,304 Member
    yes of course a big apple will have more calories than a small apple - but if OP weighs them then I think weight for weight most apples aren't going to be significantly calorie different by type.

Categories