The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness
Latest Article

The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness

Itís no secret that when people contradict themselves, it has the effect of making the flaws in their actions or statements seem glaringly obvious. But what about when WE ourselves get caught contradicting ourselves by someone else?

By: Nick Tumminello Added: January 6th, 2014
More Recent Articles
Contrast Training for Size
By: Lee Boyce
An Interview with Marianne Kane of Girls Gone Strong
By: Jordan Syatt
What Supplements Should I be Taking? By: Jay Wainwright
Bench Like a Girl By: Julia Ladewski
Some Thoughts on Building a Big Pull By: Christopher Mason

Facebook Join Facebook Group       Twitter Follow on Twitter       rss Subscribe via RSS
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Getting There... Irish Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    779

    Chicken Breast: Raw V Cooked & The Calorie World

    Ive been weighing my food for nearly a year now, and always functioned off the standard 4oz of boneless skinless chicken breast is about 110cals. This is presumed raw. There is a lot of discussion out there about whether it should be weighed raw or after cooking. Obviously the logic is that there are more calories per oz AFTER cooking due to the water/fat etc being cooked out.

    This is where it seems to get dicey.

    Ive been experimenting with my chicken lately and cant seem to resolve how many cals per oz I should be documenting. Ive gone through all the major nutrition sites, and they all have about the same info as long as you clearly select cooked, method, and raw. Say today for example. I take two unsalted, unseasoned, etc. chicken breast that weigh 5.3oz and 6.9oz respectively.

    Based on averages from all the cal counting websites for boneless skinless breast raw v cooked:

    5.3oz raw = 121 calories.
    6.9oz raw = 158 calories.

    5.2oz grilled = 238 calories
    5.6oz grilled = 257 calories

    Now as I mentioned, most people say to go by raw numbers. Obviously after the chicken cooks, the cals will be more dense as the moisture etc. is eliminated. Logic would tell me to use the numbers after cooking for calorie counting, as that is what you ACTUALLY consume. But that would mean a 121 calorie piece of chicken (per the nutrition label) has magically turned into a 238 calorie piece. Thats nearly doubled in value for a single piece!

    I know some may say Im overthinking this, but when you consume lots of chicken over the day/week/month etc. the cal difference may very well end up in lbs of difference in lost vs gained etc. Using the above numbers, imagine you at 4x4oz servings a day for the week.

    If you went by the raw numbers, you would have eaten 112oz that week and thus 12320 calories.
    If you went by cooked numbers, you would have eaten 112 oz that week and thus 20496 calories.

    Thats a 8176 calorie difference.

    So where does this leave me? I have no clue. What do those of you who weigh & log your calorie intake at log your chicken breasts at? Whats your reasoning? Did I miss anything in my logic above that would make for an obvious clarification?
    - Slave & Master At The Same Damn Time -
    Hoping To Compete Natty Early 2011

  2.    Support Wannabebig and use AtLarge Nutrition Supplements!


  3. #2
    BIG IRON FREAK
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    omaha, ne
    Posts
    109
    just weigh it cooked?

  4. #3
    Getting There... Irish Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    779
    Quote Originally Posted by Mick Manley View Post
    just weigh it cooked?
    Right, but then the cal content completely changes and based on whats given out there, that would mean that the nutrition label was wrong. If you have to 8oz pieces, the nutrition label would tell you that it was 220 calories (110 cals per 4oz usually). Say one piece reduced to 6.5oz after cooking, and the other reduced to 4.5oz. Are they both still 220 cal pieces?

    I know this all reads like Im way over analyzing it, so you will have to forgive me as Im bored at work lol.
    - Slave & Master At The Same Damn Time -
    Hoping To Compete Natty Early 2011

  5. #4
    BIG IRON FREAK
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    omaha, ne
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by Irish Pilot View Post
    Right, but then the cal content completely changes and based on whats given out there, that would mean that the nutrition label was wrong. If you have to 8oz pieces, the nutrition label would tell you that it was 220 calories (110 cals per 4oz usually). Say one piece reduced to 6.5oz after cooking, and the other reduced to 4.5oz. Are they both still 220 cal pieces?

    I know this all reads like Im way over analyzing it, so you will have to forgive me as Im bored at work lol.
    too ocd for me, i go by averages, if one piece is a lil lighter then theres gunna be a piece thats a lil higher. U need to stop focusing on little things that dont really matter.

  6. #5
    Getting There... Irish Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    779
    Quote Originally Posted by Mick Manley View Post
    ...U need to stop focusing on little things that dont really matter.
    True. Just killin time bud.
    - Slave & Master At The Same Damn Time -
    Hoping To Compete Natty Early 2011

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    134
    hey if this is fun (or at least not excruciatingly boring) then more power to you go all out ocd! I cant just do it...i have a hard enough time recording my calories and estimating.. but yeah being precise does have its benefits... being off just 10% on your daily calorie counting can lead to an extra 2-400 calories depending on diet.. and even a good calorie tracker can be off that much throughout the day so if youre going to do it and it doesnt bother you then go all out
    Last edited by Skalami; 03-30-2010 at 08:22 AM.

  8. #7
    260(-62) from 193 from 275
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Oshawa-->Toronto
    Posts
    0
    So long as your consistent your numbers are still very meaningful. What I'm getting at is if you maintain on 3000 cals (based on weighing the chicken raw) then that is your maintenance calories so long as you eat like that. The only concern would be if you cut the chicken out completely and that really skewed your numbers.

    I think from reading your posts that you are enough of a vet to respond to what the scale is telling you. I say use the raw numbers.

    The Fitness Industry is a 1 billion dollar industry.
    --Dairy Queens Blizzard pulls in 3/4 of a billion.
    --------------We are the elite.------------

Similar Threads

  1. cooked or raw?
    By MassAppeal in forum Diet and Nutrition
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-30-2008, 08:08 PM
  2. raw vs. cooked oatmeal
    By Ritzol in forum Diet and Nutrition
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-11-2007, 12:07 PM
  3. Chicken Cooked Nutrition
    By beachmuscles in forum Diet and Nutrition
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-16-2006, 10:56 AM
  4. chicken breast & steak
    By icanrace in forum Diet and Nutrition
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-08-2003, 07:39 AM
  5. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-28-2003, 01:23 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •