VeggieBoards banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
461 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
i have two calorie books ......... they are so different one is calorie king the other nutrition australia well , one says mushrooms are 9 cal per 100g , the other says 29cal. It is the same with zucchini , one says 16 per 100 and the other 26??? im just wondering how they get away with this and how they even test for the energy level? has any one eles noticed this ???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,104 Posts
uh...i have no idea. but differences like that, and in VEGGIES shouldn't be such an issue, dear. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/images/smilies/rockon.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title=":rockon:">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
461 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
oh its not just the veggies , that was my example ......... it was in everyhing some of the differences went much but others were a far deal, im trying to gain and have to stick to a certin amount and its stressing me out cause now i dont know ?//
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
318 Posts
I try and go with what is on the package, and if that is not an option, then I go with the USDA nutritional database. I have seen these differences between package labels and other sources of info. No telling who to trust.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
885 Posts
Its just an average for a test. Its not a matter of "trust" there is natural variation in these things. When you test a product, especially something fresh like veggies, there's going to be some variation in the product based on where it is grown, how big it is, etc. Like, a really big cucumber has a smaller skin / insides ratio than a skinny cuke. That sort of thing can throw off calories, especially in veggies and the like. The smaller number of calories in a food, the more likely there is to be a larger % difference from test to test. If the test was reading a difference of 400 calories versus 410 calories, no one would make a big stink of that since its only like a 2-3% difference.<br><br><br><br>
Here's an example of how to test for caloric content (at least this is how we did it in science class in school, hehe.) I'm guessing that they use something somewhat similar, but larger batches, for foods. And they take averages of several tests.<br><br><br><br><a href="http://www.exo.net/~pauld/activities/food/burnapeanut.html" target="_blank">http://www.exo.net/~pauld/activities...rnapeanut.html</a><br><br><br><br>
I think you need to throw away the calorie books my dear. I'm pretty sure you said you have an eating disorder in other threads. Most people aren't concerned about 10-20 calories, and shouldn't be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
461 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
i do have a ed and its gotton a bit out of control sorry , its just a issue thats been stressing me out<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/images/smilies/sad.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title=":(">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
824 Posts
If you are trying to gain, then an extra x - xxx calories shouldn't matter. If you were trying to maintain, I would say the same thing. Especially because BMR calculators vary greatly and they are never 100% accurate, as every person is different. So unless you get a professional BMR test done, then it is all just estimates and guesses.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top