weighing meat?

Options
thendrick
thendrick Posts: 102 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I just read that many people weight their meat and put it in baggies to freeze. Is 3oz of chicken the same raw as cooked?

Replies

  • Rambo313
    Rambo313 Posts: 179 Member
    Options
    I weigh 3-4 oz of cooked chicken. I do not weigh it before
  • 3LittleMonkeyMom
    3LittleMonkeyMom Posts: 259
    Options
    I only weigh cooked meat too.
  • 4myhealth77
    4myhealth77 Posts: 77 Member
    Options
    Weigh it AFTER it is cooked. If you weigh it before, you still have water/salt/fats in the chicken that will partially come out after cooked.
  • llkilgore
    llkilgore Posts: 1,169 Member
    Options
    Cooked meat generally weighs less because of the loss of fat and moisture during cooking. I usually weigh meat raw unless it's something like a roast that will yield several servings. I don't suppose it makes a lot of difference, though, so long as you're careful to use the right database entry.
  • Acidique
    Acidique Posts: 119 Member
    Options
    I always weigh after it's cooked.
  • Vonwarr
    Vonwarr Posts: 390 Member
    Options
    Definitely a big difference between raw and cooked... if you weigh raw make sure you use the entries that specify raw. But it's much more accurate to weigh cooked, as the method of cooking can affect the final result.
  • rmhand
    rmhand Posts: 1,067 Member
    Options
    Meat should be weighed raw because that is how the nutritional information is determined (check the package, or ask a butcher)
    3 oz of uncooked chicken translates to about 2oz if it was pan cooked or grilled.

    If your logging it at its cooked weight you might be eating more than you think.
  • jhyan
    jhyan Posts: 59 Member
    Options
    Depends. I don't weigh my food raw, then log that using a cooked food entry, or vice versa.

    If you are going to eat a cooked burger patty say... then weigh the cooked patty, and log it as a cooked patty. Understand though that if the patty came with nutritional information it is likely for the raw patty, so it will be wrong.

    I like to use the USDA database of nutritional values for cases like that. A case in point... a Costco 1/4# burger patty on the label is 300 kcals... but once cooked it is more like 220 kcals... much different wouldn't you say?
  • tlblood
    tlblood Posts: 473 Member
    Options
    Meats generally lose about 25% of the weight in cooking, so 4 oz. raw will be about 3 oz. cooked. Whether I weigh before or after depends on what I'm making. If I'm cooking the meat plain, I'll weigh it after, but if I'm cooking it with other things (stuffed chicken or turkey burgers that I have to add egg and cracker crumbs to) then I weigh it before because the cooked weight will have other things included.
  • Adsnwfld
    Adsnwfld Posts: 262 Member
    Options
    I always weigh before. That is how meat companies do it. A 1/3lb hamburger is the weight before it is cooked, so the nutrition lable is before it is cooked. If you eat 1/3 lb burger that was 1/3 lb after it was cooked you are getting more calories then the rest of the industry that weighs it before.

    Lets say something is 4oz and is 150 calories raw. after it is cooked it ends up 3 3/4 oz and is 130 calories. Now isn't it better to overestimate by20 calories then be over
    If you deep fry it or broil it in butter then that has to be added, myself I would always over estimate rather then wonder why I'm not dropping the lbs
  • BeSophisticate
    BeSophisticate Posts: 132
    Options
    Meats generally lose about 25% of the weight in cooking, so 4 oz. raw will be about 3 oz. cooked. Whether I weigh before or after depends on what I'm making. If I'm cooking the meat plain, I'll weigh it after, but if I'm cooking it with other things (stuffed chicken or turkey burgers that I have to add egg and cracker crumbs to) then I weigh it before because the cooked weight will have other things included.

    Absolutely this. In fact, I always weigh before cooking because I cook only for myself and why bother with the measuring after? The cals and nutrition are only estimates, anyway, so it's not as if being over or under by a sliver is going to make a huge difference. Extreme precision isn't only not necessary, it's impossible

    You're general rule of thumb for a serving size is 4oz raw or 3oz cooked. When a suggested serving size says 3oz, they're referring to the cooked weight, as a rule. If it says 4oz, they're referring to the raw state. If you buy a pound of raw hamburger, for example, that will make 4 servings, cooked.
  • rmhand
    rmhand Posts: 1,067 Member
    Options
    Lets say something is 4oz and is 150 calories raw. after it is cooked it ends up 3 3/4 oz and is 130 calories. Now isn't it better to overestimate by20 calories then be over

    I agree with the thought here. I'm just trying to figure out how it lost calories cooking it? I can see ground beef maybe because you leave some of the fat in pan. But I have to wonder about something leaner.
  • llkilgore
    llkilgore Posts: 1,169 Member
    Options
    ... it's much more accurate to weigh cooked, as the method of cooking can affect the final result.

    That's why I usually weigh raw - not just meat, but most things. While cooking can decrease the total calories in the serving, as it does when fat is left behind in the pan, it nearly always changes the calorie density. And I can't be sure I'll prepare anything exactly the same way very time, much less reproduce the cooking methods of whoever made the database entry. So I routinely weigh before I've introduced that variable.
  • SavCal71
    SavCal71 Posts: 350 Member
    Options
    I only weigh it before. But then I enter it as "raw" in the tracker so the calorie counts are correct.

    It doesn't really matter as long as how you weigh it is how you enter it.

    I weight it raw, becasue often my meat is mixed with other ingredients afterwards and it would be 1) messy to weigh after cooking, 2) impossible to separate the meat from the weight of the other ingredients, or 3) the meat was already marked with a weight while it was raw.
  • Adsnwfld
    Adsnwfld Posts: 262 Member
    Options
    I was thinking along the lines of ground beef or something similar. I really don't know if chicken would do that. Good research project
  • rmhand
    rmhand Posts: 1,067 Member
    Options
    I was thinking along the lines of ground beef or something similar. I really don't know if chicken would do that. Good research project

    Ok. I'm glad I didn't miss something in chemistry class. LOL.

Categories