This is what's frustrating sometimes about counting calories. The book I use says 8 cherries is 30 calories. I usually have 16, for 60 calories. When it comes to fruit and vegetables I'm not concerned about being off by 10-20 calories here and there. But I wonder what else is wrong with my calorie counts (or Fitday's, or whoever's). For example, I try to look up a skinny vanilla latte at Starbucks and get different results (I can't seem to find it on Starbuck's actual website, I have to go to 3rd party sites).
I like the idea of 1 cup cherries =1 ww point. I love cherries! I want to grow a tree!
This is what bugs me about WW, though I know they must be doing something right as it's pretty successful for lots of people.
One cup of cherries = 60 calories
One cup of blackberries = 70 calories
One cup of blueberries = 80 calories.
But they're all only 1 point??? Ooooh, that would drive me batty. Guess that's why there's different programs for different people.
Hmmm, but for that matter, if you're going to count individual cherries - that can also vary, depending on their size. You should see the enormous cherries I bought yesterday - at 99 cents a pound. Yummy!
This is what's frustrating sometimes about counting calories. The book I use says 8 cherries is 30 calories. I usually have 16, for 60 calories. When it comes to fruit and vegetables I'm not concerned about being off by 10-20 calories here and there. But I wonder what else is wrong with my calorie counts (or Fitday's, or whoever's). For example, I try to look up a skinny vanilla latte at Starbucks and get different results (I can't seem to find it on Starbuck's actual website, I have to go to 3rd party sites).
I totally agree. I usually look up three different sources and then record the average of what they tell me. It can be really frustrating.
Measuring food by weight is generally more accurate for calorie counting than volume or count, but even so calorie counting is at best an estimation system, and you've got to be able to accept that. It's frustrating only if you think it "should" be different.
But, calorie count is affected by so many variables, that you can't figure to the single calorie, or probably even to the nearest 10. What kind of cherries? How much does the edible portion of each cherry weight? What is the diameter of the cherry? How sweet is the fruit? When was it picked? What were the growing conditions - the temperature, the rain fall, the quality of the soil?
Two seemingly identical peaches, grown on the same tree, weighing the same and tasting the same, can have different calorie counts. The reason different sources list different calorie counts, is because they are using the calculations of different laboratories. Maybe the labs used a different variety of peach - or calculated the calories at a different stage of ripeness, or used peaches grown under different conditions. And even if they all used identical fruit (which would be impossible, but let's assume) they still could have ended up with a significant amount of variation....
You can deal with the inexactness in a few way, and really it doesn't matter which. I use an exchange plan (in general, a little more exact than WW points, and less exact than calorie counting). So one serving of fruit is approximately 60 calories, but it could vary by as much as 10 calories either way (on average - the actual variability could be even higher).
Yes my system is inexact, but when I've had trouble losing - it's never been because of the program's inexactness, but because I wasn't following the program.
Look at it this way. Say that a person is allowing themselves 1800 calories and they're underestimating their calories by 400 a day (and actually eating 2200 calories). The person gets on the scale and sees that they're not losing weight, so they reduce their calories by another 300 calories per day. They now think they're eating 1500 calories, but are actually eating 1835 (assuming they're "off" by the same percentage of calories). Even though the person's math is wrong - they still will lose weight.
In essence what I'm saying is that as long as you're being consistent, it doesn't matter if your math is off, because you'll use the scale to gauge your progress - and it's the progress that's important not the math.
Obviously as a person gets closer to their goal weight, the more precise and consistent they will need to be. But even so, the math doesn't have to be precisely correct it just has to be effective (and the scale will reflect that).
LOL, I was just looking up the number of WW points in a cup of cherries about 15 minutes ago! I love when they're in season (and not ridiculously expensive) and bought some yesterday, wanted to check and see what a portion size was. I'll need to measure it out, because sitting down with the entire bag would be dangerous for me!
For example, I try to look up a skinny vanilla latte at Starbucks and get different results (I can't seem to find it on Starbuck's actual website, I have to go to 3rd party sites).
Sorry to bust this thread - But I have no problem finding the nutritional information on the official Starbucks website:
For Skinny Vanilla Latte: just click on Hot Espressos and drag down to it!
Okay, I'm lame. I saw that screen and because I am not a coffee connisuer (see? I can't even spell it!), I didn't realize a latte was categorized under Espressos. Thanks for the info!
How many cherries for 60 calories?
