Variations in calories

Options
mjeck
mjeck Posts: 1 Member
in Food and Nutrition
It is difficult to tell exactly how many calories I'm consuming with such a wide discrepency in caloric count in the data base. Is everybody certain of those figures, particularly the home made or generic foods.

Replies

  • treetop57
    treetop57 Posts: 1,578 Member
    Options
    No. The best thing about My Fitness Pal is that the database is huge--largely because it's user generated. The worst thing about My Fitness Pal is that the database is inaccurate--largely because it's user generated.

    If I'm entering something that doesn't have simple nutrition labeling, I look at a bunch of different entries and pick something in the middle. This calorie counting thing is not an exact science.

    Measure with a micrometer. Mark with a piece of chalk. Cut with an axe.
  • puppycloud
    puppycloud Posts: 42
    Options
    I put in my home made foods by myself, and use the recipe tool for this.
    For other stuff, I usually check it on the box.
  • yesthistime
    yesthistime Posts: 2,051 Member
    Options
    I add several different entries of the same or similar foods and compare stats, then choose the one that seems right and delete the others. I will also Google the nutrition facts if MFP doesn't have enough suitable entries.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 9,952 Member
    Options
    Even if they were all correct, which their not, legally and practically, most will and can be out by as much as 20%. It's a quesstimate at best anyway, especially considering most people have no idea how many calories their bodies actually need or expend. Best to just monitor your weight and body fat percentage over a set time period.....12 weeks is a good format.....making slight adjustments on consumption going forward.
  • SoDamnHungry
    SoDamnHungry Posts: 6,998 Member
    Options
    I generally look at my own labels and then find a matching one in the database, or add it myself. I also look at the websites for restaurants and other sites to see if I can find a fairly accurate reading.
  • treetop57
    treetop57 Posts: 1,578 Member
    Options
    Even if they were all correct, which their not, legally and practically, most will and can be out by as much as 20%. It's a quesstimate at best anyway, especially considering most people have no idea how many calories their bodies actually need or expend. Best to just monitor your weight and body fat percentage over a set time period.....12 weeks is a good format.....making slight adjustments on consumption going forward.

    Thanks for this. I'd never heard the 20% number before, but apparently it's even worse than that. The FDA requires that food manufacturers' labels be accurate within 20% . . . but nobody ever checks!
    http://www.academymedical.com/blog/fda-falls-short-on-enforcing-nutrition-label-errors/

    The FDA doesn’t play an active role in creating nutrition labels for food. That’s left up to individual companies to test and compile their nutritional facts through a “self policing” policy. Not only does the FDA leave this critical role up to the producers, but it allows a margin of error up to 20% on the calorie counts and other values of packaged foods found on nutrition labels. Furthermore, “errors” in excess of 20% are rarely enforced. The ”FDA does not have the resources to analyze products upon request.” Instead, random (and rare) “audits” of nutrition facts, or response to reported violations, are the only way a producer can expect problems from the FDA. And even then, the FDA’s inspection and enforcement is “minimal and disorganized,” according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in a 60-page repor t last January titled, “Food Labeling: FDA Needs to Reassess Its Approach to Protecting Consumers from False and Misleading Claims.”

    The mathematician in me says, "Hey, some things are 20% under and some are 20% over so it probably averages out over the long run." But the cynic in me replies, "I bet there is a systematic bias toward claiming fewer calories than there actually are."

    All of which leads me to agree with the second half of your post. Each person needs to be patient and see what works for them, especially since the estimates of calories used are probably even more approximate than the estimates of calories consumed.
  • hellraisedfire
    hellraisedfire Posts: 403 Member
    Options
    if I have a label I use the (android) app to scan the label to get the right calories :)
  • Pebble321
    Pebble321 Posts: 6,554 Member
    Options
    For fresh food like fruit, veggies, meat etc I look for anentry with no * in front of it.
    These are entered by MFP rather than users so may be more accurate and usually have a good range of measurement options.
  • montana_girl
    montana_girl Posts: 1,403 Member
    Options
    If I'm entering something that doesn't have simple nutrition labeling, I look at a bunch of different entries and pick something in the middle. This calorie counting thing is not an exact science.

    ^^ This

    If I don't have the exact nutrional info in front of me, I do this as well.
  • ATT949
    ATT949 Posts: 1,245 Member
    Options
    TreeTop57 - Thank you for citing those sources.

    That variance is…staggering.

    After a super weight loss experience, I'm perplexed by folks who struggle to lose weight. I lost weight quickly and without fanfare and am able to drop weight at will.

    Many folks here struggle "even though they're eating their calories" that I've come to believe that perhaps folks who aren't losing weight are actually "in maintenance" — they're simply eating enough calories to keep their weight fairly constant.

    A 20% variance could be enough to cause all sorts of havoc to a weight loss effort.

    Reading through the postings about the inability to lose, plateaus, etc. I'm really very glad that I took the approach that I did to losing weight…
  • treetop57
    treetop57 Posts: 1,578 Member
    Options
    Most of the people struggling seem to small women. I think it really is easier for guys like you and me, ATT949. I suspected as much but then it was reinforced for me by this:
    Big vs. Little People

    No, I’m not talking about giants fighting midgets. I simply wanted to highlight a fact many people seem to gloss over. Because larger people have higher daily energy expenditures on average, they have more “wiggle room” calorically speaking.

    When your daily energy expenditure is 3,500+ you can afford to run a deeper deficit… maybe down to 2,000 or so. This means that even if you’re underestimating calorie intake, you’re likely to still run a deficit. Plus, if you plateau, you have some room to bring calories down a bit further.

    On the contrary, a smaller person might have a daily expenditure of 1,500 per day. Supposing she wants to lose a little fat, she can’t create near the deficit the preceding person could… at least without impacting energy levels, health, muscle, adequate nutritional status, etc. What this means is she’ll lose fat at a much slower rate. It also means that small deviations from compliance and/or small inaccuracies in calorie reporting are likely to mean her assumed deficit is really closer to maintenance. This is the primary reason so many folks are in supposed plateaus.

    Be sure you’re assessing calories relative to your status.

    http://body-improvements.com/resources/eat/#biglittle

Categories