Is there any real way of knowing how many calories you're eating?
- 10-13-2008, 11:37 PM
Is there any real way of knowing how many calories you're eating?
I've been on a religious diet as of late. Eating no more than 80 carbs a day, and around 200 grams of protein a day. However, I recently noticed that half of the information I've been entering in fitday is BS. For instance, on the side of a tuna can, it basically says that one can has about 33 grams of protein, because a serving size is 2 oz, which has 13g, and there's 2.5 servings (drained). BUT, I weighed some cans of tuna (drained) and all I got was about 2.9 oz. and rarely did it go over 3 oz, for the entire can.
Which means for each can of tuna, you get snubbed out of over 10 g's of protein. If you eat two or three cans a day, it adds up. Also, each place has different facts on chicken breasts. For instance, fitday says 6 oz. of boneless, skinless chicken breast has 51g of protein. The label for tyson chicken breasts says 6 oz. only has 37g.
So what does one do? Eat more to make up for the lost protein? Take the labels word for it and stick to the facts? Help a brother out here, because I'm kinda confused. It's not really fun weighing everything you eat, right down to the ketchup, and to find out that even after all that weighing, you're still not getting the real facts, is even more annoying.
- 10-13-2008, 11:43 PM
Stick to the labels on the foods. Don't use fitday data. Make your own fit day type set up in excel.
10-14-2008, 12:14 AM
10-14-2008, 12:22 AM
10-14-2008, 12:48 AM
10-14-2008, 01:01 AM
What about the tuna situation? should I eat more tuna or trust that the labels are right and I'm just being anal about the weight?
10-14-2008, 01:11 AM
10-14-2008, 01:32 AM
10-14-2008, 01:33 AM
10-14-2008, 10:04 AM
10-14-2008, 11:33 AM
You can always use the diet tracker on here and make up custom foods to fit what your taking in. I honestly would trust the labels and go off that.
If you keep track of food intake per what the labels say at least it will be as accurate as possible for you. Things like fruit or non labeled food can be looked up and added as well. I like to check diffrent sources and try to average out what the food should be.
10-15-2008, 02:38 PM
This article was posted not too long ago...
Nutrition labels not accurate, researcher says
Last Updated: Wednesday, May 9, 2007 | 9:57 PM ET
Consumers who scan nutrition labels on pre-packaged foods for fat content might be surprised to learn that some of the information may not be accurate, according to a Canadian researcher who has tested hundreds of products.
'There are a significant number of products which have values on the label on the carton which are not correct values.'—Bruce Holub, researcher
Over the past eight years, Bruce Holub, a food sciences professor at the University of Guelph, has tested a range of products including baby biscuits, breakfast waffles, pancake mix and chicken fingers and has found surprising results.
"There are a significant number of products which have values on the label on the carton which are not correct values based on direct analysis," Holub said.
20% variability allowed under federal regulations
While federal regulations legally allow for 20 per cent variability on the food labels, Holub said that up to 15 per cent of products surveyed exceeded the legal limit. Holub identified two products, breaded fish sticks and frozen breakfast waffles, as two offenders but he declined to name the companies that produced the products.
Holub's research is ongoing and his study has not yet been released.
Nutrition box ingredients
Food labels must list:
• Saturated fats
• Trans fats
• Vitamin A
• Vitamin C
A spokeswoman for Food and Consumer Products of Canada, an industry association, says there will always be variation but she says for the most part labels are accurate. Phyllis Tanaka says her group shares regulatory responsibilities with Canadian Food Inspection Agency.
"It's a two-pronged role — [our] industry looks after making sure that they've done their work properly, and the CFIA has a role to do monitoring of pre-packaged goods to determine if there is compliance out there."
Health Canada in 2003 introduced a new program requiring most foods to be labelled with a standardized nutrition box.
Holub notes that he handed his research over to the Canada's food watchdog over faulty nutrition boxes and said it took a year before the labels were changed.
123 food label investigations conducted in 2006
'We do not allow for information that's inaccurate to continue to be in the marketplace.'—Charmaine Kuran, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Charmaine Kuran, manager of nutritional claims at the CFIA, declined to comment on Holub's research as she's not seen it but she says the agency conducts regular inspections and pursues all complaints.
"We do not allow for information that's inaccurate to continue to be in the marketplace so it would normally be asked to be corrected immediately," she said.
In 2006, the CFIA investigated 123 food label complaints. Six companies were taken to court and received fines.
10-16-2008, 08:08 AM
So if a can of Tuna has 13g of protein per 2oz serving (drained) and there's 2.9 oz in the can (completely drained), that's really only 19 or so grams of protein right? or is my digi scale off or something?
I mean, it's simple math, I just want to know how much protein I'm actually getting. I think we all deserve to know.
10-16-2008, 08:23 AM
You can also put custom foods into fitday and not use their info. That's what I do. Fitday's pre-loaded nutritional info is very inaccurate but works fine when you input the info yourself.
10-16-2008, 11:17 AM
10-16-2008, 11:39 AM
10-16-2008, 12:30 PM
I fully understand what you are saying...We have to put faith in the food manufacturers and hope they are reasonably correct...As for the tuna...I'll weigh a few of my cans next time I eat some and see what the weight is...Is it name brand or some knock off?
10-16-2008, 05:55 PM
Trust your scale.
go here: http://www.ars.usda.gov/main/site_ma...ecode=12354500
select food type and enter portion mass to get nutritional info.
However, even if you are methodical, I think you would be lucky to get an accuracy of +/- 5% and probably more like 10%. That is why a calorie count is just a starting point. You have to test it for a few weeks and then adjust up or down.
Similar Forum Threads
- By MUDDA in forum AnabolicsReplies: 0Last Post: 03-09-2011, 02:22 AM
- By John Smeton in forum Nutrition / HealthReplies: 6Last Post: 04-05-2008, 06:50 PM
- By willis3 in forum Male Anti-Aging MedicineReplies: 14Last Post: 04-01-2007, 08:48 PM
- By friction515 in forum AnabolicsReplies: 10Last Post: 12-20-2005, 02:09 AM
- By WATERLOGGED in forum AnabolicsReplies: 6Last Post: 08-21-2004, 12:43 PM