weighing Food

[Sydking]

Now, this came about from a post i made in the digital scale thread.

And its left me with a little confusion.

My thoughts are the weight lost is just water, and the food only becomes more caloire dense.

Eg. Turkey breast, 48G of protien per 100 G.

Now eating half the pack, 250G. If i log that im my fitness pal it will do it over the 250G

Though when i cooked it it was only about 170G.

Am i gyping myself weighting Raw weight. Just becasue it weights more, Its only water weight leaving the food, Therefor that extra weight should not be included in the calorie count.

Which brings me to another point, Are nutirtion tables on meat for cooked or raw,

I so lost, I could either be undereating by alot or over eating in my counting.

 

[MaxBrenner]

Simply, if you are weighing your food do it raw and when doing your calculation do it on the raw weight.

When you log into calorie king or MFP or whatever they have raw weighted food types, so just use those calculations.

You will also tend to find slight variations in calories and macronuritent breakdown depending on the program you use, so just be consistent with the program you use to track your intake. Otherwise, use say calorie king to get the nutrient breakdown and then add the food as a 'custom food' into whatever tracking program you use if you want to be sure

 

[TrentZor]

2 of the rules with my clients and NOT make them overthink things confusing them ever more is:

1. Weigh it before cooking. Meat shrinks when cooked and u also tend to put on sauces which increases the weight.
2. ALL animal meat is 20% protien. So if u have a 100g chicken breast its 20g protien. Seafood is the exception to this rule.

 

[Sydking]

all meat would have a diffrent protien macro does it not? therefore per 100g will be all be diff, Mabey a 20% minimun?

 

[TrentZor]

i just use the 20% rule if im out and about eating out.. 20g for every 100g

 

[Sydking]

Simply, if you are weighing your food do it raw and when doing your calculation do it on the raw weight.

When you log into calorie king or MFP or whatever they have raw weighted food types, so just use those calculations.

You will also tend to find slight variations in calories and macronuritent breakdown depending on the program you use, so just be consistent with the program you use to track your intake. Otherwise, use say calorie king to get the nutrient breakdown and then add the food as a 'custom food' into whatever tracking program you use if you want to be sure

Wouldnet this have the possibility of putting someone at a deficit or a surplus? with out knowing


If i weigh raw i end up eating atlot less. though my macros on that meal are for that raw weight, I may loose about 30% of that when i actually eat it.

 

[Gunner]

Calorie king has raw and cooked weight nutritional guides. Personally I weigh mine cooked because I cook 2kg at a time on the BBQ. Refrigerate and then cut and weigh as required

 

[dave]

Wouldnet this have the possibility of putting someone at a deficit or a surplus? with out knowing


If i weigh raw i end up eating atlot less. though my macros on that meal are for that raw weight, I may loose about 30% of that when i actually eat it.

Last paragraph makes no sense. Weigh it raw get your calories total and there you have it no calories lost.

Weigh your food first then divide it up. You divide the macros and calories from your raw total by whatever number of meals you made.

Easiest way to divide up a large meal and get your calories correct.

 

[Sydking]

Last paragraph I mean if I'm logging in to my diary raw weight of meat, them I am getting the macros down for that weight, were as if they were cooked weight, it would be about 30% less in weight, therefor I am actually eating in that example 30% less then I should be

 

[Sydking]

If the nutritional table is values per 100G then people that weigh there food raw are just ripping them self off, The extra weight your logging is only water, so its has no caloric value, What ever system your using does not know this so it will just log that extra water weight at part of your macros.

To me this is the most logical way, And the only way that makes sense.

It would be like weighting your food in a container, You do eat the container so why would you log the weight,

The moisture in meat is just like its own container. so why does it need to be accounted for.

 

[dave]

If the nutritional table is values per 100G then people that weigh there food raw are just ripping them self off

No because if they use nutritional tables from their raw food they would weigh it before they cook the meal. Or they make a total using all of the ingredients, calculate the macros before it is cooked, and then divide it up afterwards (without weighing it all again as it is not needed).

What ever system your using does not know this so it will just log that extra water weight at part of your macros.

I think your issue is the system you are using. Since I just use my head and can calculate a running total I have no issues.

So I get my ingredients all raw calculate macro needs from there, cook food. Then I Divide it up into meals based upon the original macros from the raw food. I may only reweigh it to make sure they are close to even but I would not recalculate the macros I would instead only divide my original total into say quarters if I got 4 meals from it.

Does that make sense for you now?

 

[oldcorollas]

listen to Dave.

calorieking says for chicken
100g raw breast = 105cal, 22.3P
100g cooked breast = 165cal, 31g protein

for raw it says "Note: edible portion 64% (meat)", so you lose 36% as water when cooking = cooked macros. (ie, raw x 100/64 = cooked protein and cal)

 

[Sydking]

No because if they use nutritional tables from their raw food they would weigh it before they cook the meal. Or they make a total using all of the ingredients, calculate the macros before it is cooked, and then divide it up afterwards (without weighing it all again as it is not needed).



I think your issue is the system you are using. Since I just use my head and can calculate a running total I have no issues.

So I get my ingredients all raw calculate macro needs from there, cook food. Then I Divide it up into meals based upon the original macros from the raw food. I may only reweigh it to make sure they are close to even but I would not recalculate the macros I would instead only divide my original total into say quarters if I got 4 meals from it.

Does that make sense for you now?

So the tables are done on how the food is sold, eg raw chicken is raw value. Also I use my fitness pal with custom macros, latley I have been using the barcode scaner. So its accurate, just now sure on the weight I use, because I will scan in the raw chicken breast, but log in the cooked weight,

 

[_Gruph_]

This used to do my head in bro! Now I just weigh all mine cooked and base it off cooked weight, I assess my results and increase or decrease as I need to. The worst thing u can do it chop and change between the two, just pik one and stick to it and assess at the end of the month. I must admit as my bf% decreased it was easier to notice and track the results but that method is working for me just fine.

 

[dave]

If you are going to log cooked weights then just find the numbers on the net for your cooked food and stick with only using cooked as gruph stated. As long as you understand that using raw values does not lose you calories if you are calculating correctly is all that matters.

 

[MaxBrenner]

If you are going to log cooked weights then just find the numbers on the net for your cooked food and stick with only using cooked as gruph stated. As long as you understand that using raw values does not lose you calories if you are calculating correctly is all that matters.

This

 

[Sydking]

If you are going to log cooked weights then just find the numbers on the net for your cooked food and stick with only using cooked as gruph stated. As long as you understand that using raw values does not lose you calories if you are calculating correctly is all that matters.

I am probly just confussing myself.

Though. why should the value of cooked and raw be any differant if its just water weight?

I undersatand logging in 100G raw chciekn breast, When you ate 100G breast deep fried.

My point is, The lost water weight throught cooking is being accounted for when logging raw food, Might only be an extra 60gms or so, But X that by 3 or 4 meals and it would affect you end of week macros.

 

[oldcorollas]

lets say for example..

100g raw chicken.
=20g protein, 40g random shit, 40g water

you cook it.. now it is 60g
= 20g protein, 40g random shit, NO water (just for example)

how have you affected your end of week macros if you have logged 20g protein, and eaten 20g protein?


log your uncooked weight for shit you will cook.
log the cooked weight for shit you buy already cooked (and thus cannot weigh uncooked)
K.I.S.Stupid

 

[oldcorollas]

worked example.

Raw chicken CalorieKing.com.au - Food Data. Nutrition information about your favourite food. fat, fibre, protein and more
Calories 105******( Kilojoules 438 )
Total Fat 1.6 g
Carbohydrate 0 g
Dietary Fibre 0 g
Protein 22.3 g

raw chicken protein is 22.3%, 105cal per 100g


cooked chicken CalorieKing.com.au - Food Data. Nutrition information about your favourite food. fat, fibre, protein and more
Calories 165 ( Kilojoules 690 ) (SHOULD BE 156)

Total Fat 3.6 g
Carbohydrate 0 g 0%
Dietary Fibre 0 g 0%
Protein 31 g

cooked chicken is 31%protein, 156cal per 100g


assuming only water is lost.. and protein amount doesn't change..

100g of cooked chicken =~139g of raw chicken...

from that we get
protein, 31g vs 31g
fat, 3.6 vs 2.2
calories, 156 vs 145cal

the difference in calories is basically due to the different amounts of fat that calorieking has listed...(ie, 12cal)
ie, either could be right, and both could be wrong for YOUR chicken, is all an approximation...

so just log what you weigh, in the state that you weigh it.

the 60g of water you lose in 3 or 4 meals, is 180-240grams of WATER.
if you log raw, and weigh raw, water won't affect your macros.

edit: think of cooked and raw as different foods.
if you weighed carrots, you wouldn't log it as chocolate cake would you?

edit2: btw, Calorieking is WRONG with cooked calories.... 31*4+3.6*9 = 156cal not 165cal...

 

[_Gruph_]

Just to throw a spanner in the works... I rekon if a chicken breast was put in a vice and squeezed to buggery untill it was pretty much dehidrated and all the juice was caught in one of those juice catchers from a george forman grill and tipped into a beaker then rushed to a lab at 100 miles an hour and tested for protein content, I have a hunch there would be protein in it not just water! But dont worry bout it man, just find out the cooked weight macros and eat it all up its too enjoyable to worry about what is lost in cooking. Dont calculate ur macros to the tee in the store b4 buying the food, just fill up ur trolly figure out the cooked macros and calculate ur required macros and calorie needs based on after cooking it. Too easy