Do you ever distrust the nutritional info provided on foods?

aoikirin
aoikirin Posts: 143
edited December 21 in Food and Nutrition
I don't normally, but there are these fantastic Chinese scallion pancakes I got before starting this that claim on their packaging to be only 81 calories each:

http://www.tyloon.com/goods/10718/scallion-pancake.html


I do not see how this is possible. Granted, these do not have lard, which many other versions do but still! The ingredients are wheat flour, malted barley flower, niacin, iron, thiamine mononitrate, riboflavin, water, soybean oil, scallions, salt.

1 piece is 85g and supposedly has 81 calories, 3g fat, 139 mg sodium, 2g protein, I just don't believe that calorie number. It's too low! Other brands I have seen have lard and are 250-300 cals. I don't think it's just the lard though. My version has lots of oil too.

I haven't eaten them while on this plan (12-13 days so far) because I don't want to sabotage myself by eating something that has 3x the calories that are listed. What do you think? Should I just pretend like they are 250 cals each?

BTW these are from L.A. and are made in the US. So all the dietary info laws should apply. I just don't think their numbers are right.

Replies

  • Pebble321
    Pebble321 Posts: 6,423 Member
    Hmmm, tricky. Sometimes I think the info might just have an error, but more often I think they do tricky things with serving sizes.
    Double check that 1 pancake = 1 serving. Sometimes logic does not apply here!
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    you didn't list the carbs - 3g of fat is 27 calories and 2g of protein is 8, so that's 35. To get to 81 we need another 46 which would be 11.5g of carbs which sounds feasible. I'm guessing they are fairly moist ?
  • aoikirin
    aoikirin Posts: 143
    you didn't list the carbs - 3g of fat is 27 calories and 2g of protein is 8, so that's 35. To get to 81 we need another 46 which would be 11.5g of carbs which sounds feasible. I'm guessing they are fairly moist ?

    Yes when they are cooked in the oven. They get crispy and are a bit oily, not super oily but somewhat. Total Carbs are 11g.
  • aoikirin
    aoikirin Posts: 143
    Hmmm, tricky. Sometimes I think the info might just have an error, but more often I think they do tricky things with serving sizes.
    Double check that 1 pancake = 1 serving. Sometimes logic does not apply here!

    That's a thought but there are 5 pancakes and 5 servings so alas, no. ;(
  • hongruss
    hongruss Posts: 389 Member
    I read somewhere that manucacturers have to be within 20% of the "actual" numbers & that allowance is because of the variance in batch cooking, not sure how true it is but it sounded right to me.

    Russ
  • luhluhlaura
    luhluhlaura Posts: 278 Member
    I often feel this way as well...but more about other nutritional content than strictly calories. (Like come on, do you REALLY believe that all the foods that contained trans fats are now trans-fat free?! NO. The product manufacturers have just found tricky ways of getting around the FDA guidelines)
    But the majority of the product tends to be made out of the first few ingredients, and soybean oil is close to last. Plus, lard is a highly concentrated source of fat calories but bakes up lighter and fluffier than oil (think flakey pie crusts and croissants...lol) so in the other products, lard is likely to be higher on the ingredients list.
    So, I'm guessing that listing is fairly accurate. Don't sweat it. :)
  • usernamekelly1
    usernamekelly1 Posts: 1,941 Member
    I read somewhere that manucacturers have to be within 20% of the "actual" numbers & that allowance is because of the variance in batch cooking, not sure how true it is but it sounded right to me.

    Russ

    This is true they have a 20% grace which is also one of the reasons I don't eat all my exercise calories back. The other reason being is my HRM is only an estimation so baring these both in mind I only eat part of them back!
  • weathergirl320
    weathergirl320 Posts: 331
    The food industries are sneaky. I don't ever trust labels. Recently a bunch of stuff listed as gluten free was really not. I have actual celiac so that can be painful to me.
  • Astroduckula
    Astroduckula Posts: 70
    Hey ya, I googled scallion pancakes and found a few you could make yourself you could check how much you're putting into them and work it out (and most of the time they'll taste better) and on the food network I found recipe for them with a yummy sounding ginger dipping sauce.

    Here's the recipe: http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/ming-tsai/scallion-pancakes-with-ginger-dipping-sauce-recipe/index.html

    As for whether or not I trust the nutritional labels, I do most of the time, maybe in the UK things are different but the nutritional labels make perfect sense to me.
  • aoikirin
    aoikirin Posts: 143
    I read somewhere that manucacturers have to be within 20% of the "actual" numbers & that allowance is because of the variance in batch cooking, not sure how true it is but it sounded right to me.

    Russ

    This is true they have a 20% grace which is also one of the reasons I don't eat all my exercise calories back. The other reason being is my HRM is only an estimation so baring these both in mind I only eat part of them back!


    I never knew!
  • nickyrobinson
    nickyrobinson Posts: 161 Member
    I read somewhere that manucacturers have to be within 20% of the "actual" numbers & that allowance is because of the variance in batch cooking, not sure how true it is but it sounded right to me.

    Russ

    My understanding is that they have a 20% spread, that is, plus or minus 10%.

    Honestly, the numbers on labels are probably at least as accurate as people's ability to measure the food.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories