Miscounted calories; cooked vs. uncooked

This topic contains 3 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by wiltldnrUSA 10 years, 8 months ago.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

viisikaksi

6:24 pm
14 Aug 13
Permalink

I just read interesting article regarding the calorie count: http://news.sciencemag.org/evolution/2013/02/have-we-been-miscounting-calories

Professor Wrangham and his team have studied that it is very likely that current counting system is inaccurate, especially for cooked food.

Quite interesting, when considering our fast days and 500/600 kcal!

wiltldnrUSA

7:14 pm
7 Sep 13
Permalink

viisikaksi

the usa gov site supertracker that i use

is specific on raw cooked or how it was cooked

there is a real difference w/ the way we cook eggs calorie wise

w/ nonstick spray or fried w/ no fat etc

viisikaksi

7:32 pm
7 Sep 13
Permalink

Thanks for the link! It is quite amazing that cabbage, raw, 22 kcal and cabbage, boiled, 35 kcal or egg, raw, 63 and egg, boiled, 77 kcal…

wiltldnrUSA

8:24 pm
7 Sep 13
Permalink

viisikaksi

ur welcome

https://www.supertracker.usda.gov

yepper i realized how exacting they were

it is cool when i find more cals available on fastdays 😀

what i really like is the nutrient report of the foods

i’m eating so i can adjust if something is missing

or how many calories i have eaten average since march/13

or protein carbs exporting 2 excel which i gave to my doc

or copy pasting in2 evernote 4 my tablet

& again showing it 2 doc

it is 2 good though we still want to be able 2 do recipes 2 save
they have food combo but it is not the same no area 2 put
instructions

@ least it let’s u input in ur foods

like kelp noodles which they do not have

just took seaweed & modified it w. label info

u get in2 a good rhythm

i have never kept a food journal or cals in my life
but this is easy copy pasting

what would we do if we did not have a computer? ugh