Microwave popcorn
 

First of all, I understand that 1tbsp unpopped kernals = 1 cup or whatever popcorn, so they'd have the same calories even though there is much "more" popcorn. I know that's a common question, but that's not what I'm wondering about, lol.

I got some Orville Smart Pop Butter full size bags. On the box, it says that there are 3tbsp/serving, and 2 servings/bag. So 6tbsp in 1 bag. I had a busy schedule yesterday and missed a snack, so I had calories left over for a bigger evening treat. So I figured I'd eat a whole bag of popcorn, which would be 6tbsp of kernals (220 cal).

So I nuked the bag, and I haaaaate having burnt popcorn, so I always stop the microwave as soon as the popping slows down. Consequently, I always have leftover unpopped kernals in the bag. Just out of curiosity, I measured out the unpopped kernals, and there were two whole tablespoons that were unpopped! I'm not one to get really obsessive about counting every calorie, but 6tbsp of kernals = 220 cal. 4tbsp = 148. That's quite a difference and worth counting the difference for.

So is it a fair policy to measure out my unpopped kernals at the bottom of a bag and subtract them from the 6tbsp/bag?

Well I don't think that'd be entirely fair as whatever oil is there is still on the rest of the kernels.

LOL - I love this post. IMO I'd count those left over kernels and subtract as you suggest. I am laughing because that is so like the questions I have. Also, my evening snack is a 100 cal. (which by the way is really 110 cal.) bag of kettle corn. Last night I hit the timer almost perfectly. There was one lone kernel at the bottom of the bowl and only a couple slightly scorched pieces.

I have totally thought about this issue too! I haven't ever subtracted calories off, but I have gotten it to an art for how long a 100 calorie bag needs to be in my microwave for maximal poppage without burning.

Because popcorn is so low in calories, I think it's not worth it to worry about leftovers in the bag. I would worry about it more if it were something much more calorie dense.

I don't subtract simply because I'd rather over estimate by 80 or so calories then underestimate.

Originally Posted by 8675309:
I don't subtract simply because I'd rather over estimate by 80 or so calories then underestimate.

me too - I would definitely not use it as a reason to eat more, but on the other hand, I also wouldn't worry that much if I ended up slightly high for the day either. But that's how I approach my calories overall - my range is 1200 to 1500, but I consider myself on plan as long as I'm below 1600. I average about 1400 a day so I'm not using that as an excuse to regularly eat more, more of an acknowledgment that even with being careful about weighing and measuring, calorie counting still isn't an exact science.

Ha! I love this post too. I would subract the unpopped kernels because overestimating what I eat is just as bad as underestimating, and I really try hard to be accurate. Sometime I drive myself crazy with it, but it's mainly because I am new to this. I'm certain with time and practice I will have this down pat.

Thanks for the replies, you guys :) It's amazing how many strategies of calorie counting we all have. As long as it's working for us, huh!

I'm definitely not an obsessive calorie counter. If I'm using a 10cal serving of fat free mayo, psh, I'm not going to measure that out and record it, lol. But, I'm fairly active during the day, and I also never record calories that I burned vaccuming or walking across campus carrying two textbooks or anything like that.

That being said, 80 calories is a significant chunk to me. I could eat a few more ounces of chicken for 80 calories. A whole extra serving of veggies at lunch. An orange. Lots of things. It's worth counting, in my opinion.

I've been debating whether or not to buy a digital food scale and weigh food to be sure. My nutritional software has calories by grams for every food in the database. I take the generic count for an apple or an egg, but they can be different sizes and perhaps I could improve my count accuracy. My hesitation is that I want this to be simple and easy and not bordering on obsession. On the other hand, you're right, 80 calories is significant enough to make a difference. Thnking on it.

the thing is, unless you measured the pre-popped portion before you cooked it, you don't know exactly what size that was either. They may not put exactly the same amount into each bag or they may allow for a certain amount of kernels that are expected to remain unpopped.

And even if you do measure things precisely (and I use my food scale all the the time), you still don't know the exact number of calories in it - it's a general estimate but if every single piece of food was actually scientifically analyzed, as an example, 4 ounces of apple isn't always going to have the exact same number of calories - different trees, different growing condition, etc. can all make the nutritional component of a food change and the calories will be slightly altered. Not by a huge amount, but enough so that no matter how precisely you weigh and measure and count, it's never going to be an exact science.