CONSPIRACY THEORY: FOOD COMPANIES CONFLICTING DATA

Options
2

Replies

  • UsedToBeHusky
    UsedToBeHusky Posts: 15,229 Member
    Options
    Last night I had a Gianelli Hot Italian Sausage. It said a serving was one link, but it also had (3.5g) beside it. Still you imagine since the links are pre-cut, that one is a serving. Then it said one link was 190 calories. Well, I love Hoffman German franks, and I know they are like 230 calories, and they're a lot smaller. So I got suspicious & started figuring out the weight of the whole package, how many were in there, etc, and it worked out to each link being 342 cals, 5.6 oz each. I do think they purposely misstate the label. One link? Ya, the size of a breakfast sausage link, maybe! Guess we all need to get food scales. :grumble:

    I AGREE! One thing that suprised me recently was that Whataburger sweet tea has around 450 calories for a large and when I used to go there I'd drink 2 of those. I'd drink one there and get a refill to go, that's 900 calories!

    If you look up McDonalds sweet tea, there's is supposedly 280 or so calories for a large and I know for a fact that McDonalds sweets tea is probably 2x sweeter than Whataburgers sweet tea, they really pour the sugar in it! Sometimes I have to ask them to dillute it!

    So I know for a fact that there is no way on earth a McDonald's large tea is 280 calories but that's what their website claims. I think the number they turn in is different than real world preparation for it. You have to be careful, and just like you did, compare what the competition is showing as their amounts if it seems too good to be true.

    Well there is always human error, but these restaurant chains have a general protocol for making sweet tea. That doesn't necessarily mean that the employees will follow it. If you want to be more confident in the calorie content of tea, then drink unsweetened and make your sweet tea at home.
  • cheesy_blasters
    cheesy_blasters Posts: 283 Member
    Options
    you think a multi billion dollar chain restaurant needs to get on a website and trick a few people into eating there more than once? ok.

    I feel sorry for whatever person ended up with that job. I'm guessing it's some unpaid student intern who they kill once the internship is over so they would never be able to reveal the GIANT SECRET that would rock the free weight loss site industry.
  • gogojodee
    gogojodee Posts: 1,261 Member
    Options
    Do you think some food companies get on sites like this and others and add entries to their foods that are much healthier than they really are to make it harder for you to find the true amounts? I double check everything I enter but I notice for example McDonalds has a wide range on certain food items entered multiple times that are wrong. Sometimes you have to really dig to find the right one and many times there are only a couple of confirms on them! Seriously, you know A LOT of people are eating those same items, so where are all the multiple confirms at? Seems like they have been MAGICALLY disappearing?? hmmm.

    Powerade is another example. The powerade mountain blast that has been entered and confirmed by people to have 56grams of carbs for a 32oz container yet only 200 calories listed. If you do the math, a carb equals 4 calories, 56x4=225 calories!

    I even looked at a 32oz powerade container at the store and it clearly says on it 225 calories! It's either they are now getting away with stating less calories on certain containers or are coming up with a new way to count carbs or something.

    CARBS = 4 calories
    PROTEIN = 9 calories
    FAT = 9

    You can always double check based on that.

    Bump. And agreed!
  • Dawners98
    Dawners98 Posts: 120 Member
    Options
    Well, I don't know about a conspiracy theory, but it's always difficult to say for certainty how many calories are in something you didn't prepare yourself. Even if it's standard procedure to make something a certain way, it's always possible that it will vary from person to person during preparation. I do the best I can to account for what I eat when I eat out, but I know it's not foolproof and I just accept it.

    Although that tidbit about the sausage links I find particularly interesting and will be double checking if I eat any sausage in the future!
  • kutterba
    kutterba Posts: 107 Member
    Options
    I don't think there's a conspiracy, but have you noticed on TV that the food companies are advertising that they now put all the information in BIG numbers and on the front? I think in some cases the calorie count has changed - some up and some down. What I do is go through the list and try to find the entry that matches. There is usually one. I have more time than good sense since I'm retired, so I do that. What I mean is, I have trouble adding new foods - the site won't let me add the portions listed.
    Anyway, no on the conspiracy, yes on the changing calories from "then" and "now." IMHO. :wink:
    Oh, in a few cases I've corrected the counts- you can do that instead of creating a whole new entry.
    Good luck and good counting! Don't get all OC about it. :laugh:
  • ChelseaM18
    ChelseaM18 Posts: 303
    Options
    Yeah , I got burned pretty bad by the pop-tart trickaroonie.
    But I dunno, it's just clever marketing I guess, but they often put down the '100g' info when it's only 90gs or whatever so it would make you wonder the whole purpose of it.

    But putting the exact quantity and info would be pretty useful :)
  • BigenFluffy
    BigenFluffy Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    Some foods that are named the same have different ingredients in different countries, which would account for some of the inaccuracies.

    Just a thought. Not a conspiracy.
  • BigenFluffy
    BigenFluffy Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    I don't think there's a conspiracy, but have you noticed on TV that the food companies are advertising that they now put all the information in BIG numbers and on the front? I think in some cases the calorie count has changed - some up and some down. What I do is go through the list and try to find the entry that matches. There is usually one. I have more time than good sense since I'm retired, so I do that. What I mean is, I have trouble adding new foods - the site won't let me add the portions listed.
    Anyway, no on the conspiracy, yes on the changing calories from "then" and "now." IMHO. :wink:
    Oh, in a few cases I've corrected the counts- you can do that instead of creating a whole new entry.
    Good luck and good counting! Don't get all OC about it. :laugh:

    The big numbers on the front sure save me a lot of time when I pick out cereal!
  • Ercha7
    Ercha7 Posts: 7
    Options
    4 cals in a protein.

    How do you add items? I have noticed some are wrong as well.
  • onedayillbeamilf
    onedayillbeamilf Posts: 966 Member
    Options
    Enjoying your crusade?
  • Qatsi
    Qatsi Posts: 2,191 Member
    Options
    I always love too when people put in just the calories for an item but nothing else. um hello? If you are going to bother putting it in please fill out all of the info. You are not the only one that may use that item. I have edited a few things and always say what or why i did it.
    If I'm entering a pre-packaged product, I enter all the numbers on the nutritional label as a matter of course.

    But I've also added a number of craft beers to the database. "Nutritional" info on these is virtually absent. I come up with an estimate on calories based on the alcohol content and style, using the chart on this page:
    http://www.simplybeer.com/how-many-calories-are-in-my-beer/
    Maybe for some products they have redone their menu or product and that equals less calories. However like you said some are just wrong..lol
    This happens a LOT. Rather than raise the price on an item, they'll reduce the net weight of the package. Along the way, the serving sizes might get rejiggered as well.
  • athensguy
    athensguy Posts: 550
    Options
    Why do people agonize over accurate calorie counts?

    I mean, I can understand where you are coming from if it is sabotage (though to me that seems a bit paranoid). But... in reality, MFP can't accurately predict your TDEE, and therefore, is only projecting a potential calorie count to create a deficit. If we are already estimating in the first place, then why do we need to weigh out every morsel we put into our mouths?

    Again, the kind of corporate espionage that you have described is jacked up, but I seriously doubt they are too worried about MFP users choosing something other than McDonald's when MFP users only make up the tiniest fraction of their total market share.

    I just don't understand obsessing about calorie counts when we are already estimating in the first place.

    If you can accurately record the calories you take in, you can find out how accurate your TDEE estimate is over time by looking at your results. If you're not trying to be accurate, then I'm not sure why you would record calories at all.

    Also, regarding the OP, protein nominally has about 4 calories per gram, not 9. Alcohol has about 7.
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    Do you think some food companies get on sites like this and others and add entries to their foods that are much healthier than they really are to make it harder for you to find the true amounts? I double check everything I enter but I notice for example McDonalds has a wide range on certain food items entered multiple times that are wrong. Sometimes you have to really dig to find the right one and many times there are only a couple of confirms on them! Seriously, you know A LOT of people are eating those same items, so where are all the multiple confirms at? Seems like they have been MAGICALLY disappearing?? hmmm.

    Powerade is another example. The powerade mountain blast that has been entered and confirmed by people to have 56grams of carbs for a 32oz container yet only 200 calories listed. If you do the math, a carb equals 4 calories, 56x4=225 calories!

    I even looked at a 32oz powerade container at the store and it clearly says on it 225 calories! It's either they are now getting away with stating less calories on certain containers or are coming up with a new way to count carbs or something.

    CARBS = 4 calories
    PROTEIN = 9 calories
    FAT = 9

    You can always double check based on that.
    Yes, because this makes so much more sense than user error, typos, or *gasp* the fact that the same item can have different nutritional information in different countries, due to individual regulations, and that this is a world wide site, with a world wide database.

    sarcasm.gif
  • Glucocorticoid
    Glucocorticoid Posts: 867 Member
    Options
    35cffn.jpg
  • SenshiV
    SenshiV Posts: 131 Member
    Options
    Trying to be so accurate will drive you nuts. I agree overestimating is safe...

    Just add your own foods. Sooner than you realize you will have everything you usually eat, with numbers straight from the package/scale math or whatever and you will feel okay using those instead of some you don't know where they came from.

    When you are not sure, look over the net for at least 3 to 5 sources, if they are not consistent, add he average.

    Good luck :)
  • happyfeetrebel1
    happyfeetrebel1 Posts: 1,005 Member
    Options
    LOL

    This OP is really on a roll today. A LOT of food companies are clearly trying to sabotage weight loss in this country.

    Anyone seen my hat?!
  • AllTehBeers
    AllTehBeers Posts: 5,030 Member
    Options
    There are somethings that may have different values that at first I thought were wrong but figured out that sometimes products come in different single serve packages. Example: Lays single serving from a big bag is different from a 2oz single serve bag like you pick up from the convenience store which is also different then the 1oz single serve bags that subway sells. So there are three different entries, all for a single serving but all correct based on which bag you buy. It's still the same amount of calories for the grams, just a different amount of grams in the bag.
  • Anjoya
    Anjoya Posts: 6
    Options
    I am part of another group and a guy on that site said the other day he had mentioned a particular protein shakes in a discussion and later that day he got an email from that company on that same site asking him to do a survey about the protein shakes. They are always checking on their product. The guy from now on is going to not spell out the brand name completely that way the company can't find that he is talking about it. I never even knew that could happen. It's kind of weird.
  • mrsjuliana
    mrsjuliana Posts: 27 Member
    Options
    I thought it was carbs and protein are both 4 calories, and fat is 9.
  • happyfeetrebel1
    happyfeetrebel1 Posts: 1,005 Member
    Options
    I am part of another group and a guy on that site said the other day he had mentioned a particular protein shakes in a discussion and later that day he got an email from that company on that same site asking him to do a survey about the protein shakes. They are always checking on their product. The guy from now on is going to not spell out the brand name completely that way the company can't find that he is talking about it. I never even knew that could happen. It's kind of weird.

    I am on that site too..and there is an option to NOT have any posts you make be 'seen' by search engines.

    You can set it to viewable by

    Friends
    Members
    EVERYONE. That would include search engines. I hide all my stuff now :)

Categories