View Full Version : Food for thought (serving size)

Slim Schaedle
03-17-2005, 10:16 PM
This thread does not really require help, as I can already solve the problem with the use of my food scale, but...

I've noticed this dilemma with many foods products, those that are prepackaged and those that aren't, and often vary in size and shape. (chicken breasts, potatos)

My concern is the serving size included in the nutrition facts, in relation to each individual food item that serving size pertains to, and the macronutrient amounts claimed. In very many cases, the advertised nutrition facts are wrong, according to what my food scale reads.

For example, I just took a regular potato from a bag that lists the serving size as "1 potato" weighing 148 grams. The carbohydrate amount listed is 29 grams. Granted, each potato varies somewhat in size and shape but each one from this bag were exremely similar.

When weighed, one particular potato weighed 333 grams as opposed to the 148 grams listed. So, contradicting the 29 grams of carbohydrate, each potato in this bag has roughly 65 grams. That's a big difference for us calorie obsessed weirdos. Imagine having a diet that included carbohydrate sources of only potatos and only trusting the nutrition fatcs. That person would unknowingly get twice as many carb cals as they planned.

I just wanted some opinions/thoughts from those as picky (or those who don't care) as me, b/c this seems to be some sort false advertising...intentional or innocent.

(note: I don't believe the scale reads wrong b/c there are many other foods that parallel the manufature's claims perfectly)

03-17-2005, 10:33 PM
if i was eating potatoes while cutting, i'd probably use the scale and calculate from there instead of using the nutrition fact label. i agree that it's scary how "off" calculations can get because of the difference in sizes and weight. an individual label for each potato would be nice :P but i don't think i can expect the manufacturer to do that lol.

03-17-2005, 11:02 PM
I had a very similar experience, but it was a little more my fault (only a little though.) I looked up nutrition facts online for sweet potatoes and all the measurements say "1 medium potato" has like 130 cals and 27g carbs, give or take...

So, at the store I picked out some of the "medium" potatoes...not the biggest, not the smallest, just the average ones. I did this for about a week, and finally got around to weighing one (i don't typically weigh food)......Ends up an "average" potato from the store was like twice as big as a "medium potato" in terms of grams. When I went back to the store the next time, I bought the smallest potato I could find and it was still heavier than what online nutrition facts call a "large potato."

That really pissed me off, I realized I was getting like 35g extra carbs each time I had one of those damn potatoes. From then on I just stuck to packaged stuff or food that you can measure in a measuring cup (rice, oatmeal, etc)

03-18-2005, 12:26 AM
This is why I invested in a decent scale.

03-18-2005, 01:13 PM
I like to go by weight on solid foods rather than guesstimating a portion size or measuring with a cup. Even if my cheap scale from Walmart is not very accurate it is a lot closer.