[DoingMyBest79]

I'm trying to confirm the calories in 1 teaspoon vanilla extract.

I have seen the following on several sites:

Pure vanilla extract: 12 cal/teaspoon
Imitation vanilla extract: 2 cal/teaspoon

Does that sound correct? I'm wondering why pure extract would have so many more calories than imitation.

I use a few teaspoons per day mixed into seltzer with stevia, and every little bit adds up! I want to make sure I'm tracking it correcly.

Thanks!!

[kaplods]

So at most you're talking about 35 calories per day. To equal a pound that means that if you do count your vanilla corectly, you'll have lost one pound (actually not even) more than if you didn't count it at all.

Yes, every little bit adds up, but you have to know what it adds up to. In the scheme of things, this doesn't matter - especially since you're monitoring your progress as you go along.

If you're not losing as well as you'd like (whether you're counting exactly, or whether you're over or underestimating your calories), you're going to cut back on your calories even further - so you're going to be losing regardless of how "off" your count is. You may think you're eating 1500 calories when you're really eating 1800 calories, but if you cut your calories (because you're not losing) by 300 calories, that just means you're going to be eating 1200 calories when you think you're eating eating 1500. But either way, you're now eating less, so you will lose.

The difference between imitation vanilla and pure vanilla is an average. There are imitation vanilla extracts that have more calories than pure vanilla, and there are pure vanilla extracts that have fewer calories than some imitation extracts.

Partially, it depends on which solvent (liquid) used. Pure vanilla extracts tend to be higher in alcohol than imitation (because the chemical used to make imitation vanilla doesn't need to be "dissolved" in the same way that pure vanilla does).

The only way to know how many calories are the vanilla you use, is to read the label it comes in.

Most list zero calories per teaspoon, because it's fewer than five.


But here's the rub - what you're eating never has the number of calories in it (except by chance) as the calorie counting resources say - because two apples, of the same exact size and weight, growing on the same tree can still have different calorie counts. All the calorie counts are only estimates.

So while "every little bit counts" you cannot count every little bit. There's no way to tell whether you're eating 1500 calories or 1700.

But that's ok, because it only matters over time - and if you aren't losing you're going to adjust those calories and you will lose weight whether or not you're counting is spot on.

This is important because if you stress over what will only amount to an ounce or two difference in weight loss per week, you're going to have a whole lot of unnecessary stress in your life (and in the long-term stress makes your body burn fewer calories, so not worrying about it could actually improve your weight loss).

[DoingMyBest79]

Kaplods, thanks so much for the information - very insightful! Everything you said makes sense. Especially interesting about the same foods having different calorie counts each time (even an apple!) Both bottles of vanilla don't have nutrition labels, so there's no info there.

I understand that the calorie count of vanilla is tiny in the grand scheme of things, but I still want to know so I can make educated decisions about my drink choices -- I had been choosing my seltzer/vanilla drink over coffee with half & half because I thought the seltzer/vanilla had zero calories. Now, since I know that both drinks contain a few calories, I can remove the calorie count from my decision process. Now that I know it has some calories (and knowing that my 30-minute slow stroll only burns ~60 calories), I can decide whether it's worth it to me to drink it instead of water.

My one concern is that I'm maintaining right now, not trying to lose. If I unknowingly consume an extra 35 calories a day, couldn't that add up to a 3-4 pounds per year?

[TripSwitch]

Originally Posted by DoingMyBest79

Kaplods, thanks so much for the information - very insightful! Everything you said makes sense. Especially interesting about the same foods having different calorie counts each time (even an apple!) Both bottles of vanilla don't have nutrition labels, so there's no info there.

I understand that the calorie count of vanilla is tiny in the grand scheme of things, but I still want to know so I can make educated decisions about my drink choices -- I had been choosing my seltzer/vanilla drink over coffee with half & half because I thought the seltzer/vanilla had zero calories. Now, since I know that both drinks contain a few calories, I can remove the calorie count from my decision process. Now that I know it has some calories (and knowing that my 30-minute slow stroll only burns ~60 calories), I can decide whether it's worth it to me to drink it instead of water.

My one concern is that I'm maintaining right now, not trying to lose. If I unknowingly consume an extra 35 calories a day, couldn't that add up to a 3-4 pounds per year?

Here's the math on that one...

35 x 365 = 12,775

12,775 divided by 3,500 = 3.65

So to answer your question... In theory... Yes... But in reality... Probably not...

[kaplods]

Originally Posted by DoingMyBest79

My one concern is that I'm maintaining right now, not trying to lose. If I unknowingly consume an extra 35 calories a day, couldn't that add up to a 3-4 pounds per year?

Only if you refuse to step on a scale, EVER. Sure if you never step on a scale AND refuse to pay attention to how your clothes are fitting, AND refuse to pay attentio to how you look in the mirror... then yes those 35 calories "in theory" might matter.

But you're not going to do that are you? Aren't you going to keep getting on the scale periodically, and making adjustments as you need to?

You will never know exactly how many calories you take in, and you'll have even less control over how many calories you burn.... so you will always have to use the mirror, the scale, and your waistband to give you the feedback necessary to control your weight whether you're trying to lose or maintain.

The've done some interesting studies of calorie increases and decreases, and found that when you cut or add calories to an average person's diet, they neither gain nor lose as much as you would expect them to by the calorie difference.

There are literally folks who if you give them extra food, their bodies will just naturally burn more. The don't consciously make the decision to be more active or burn more calories at rest - their bodies just do it.

Now most of us (at least here on 3FC) probably don't fit into that catagory, but even so, none of us are ever going to be able to have absolutely precise math.

One of the best rationales for using less accurate math (and being ok with that) is that sometimes the precision itself is what drives folks off plan. They feel they've "blown it" when they discover they've eaten 30, 300, or even 3000 calories off plan, without realizing that even 200,000 calories isn't "blowing it." The only way to "blow it," is to give up.

So if you stop using your scale, if you stop paying attention to the fit of your clothes, or your appearance in the mirror, and if you stop counting at all... then you'll have to worry about weight gain.

However, even if you're counting by extremely rough estimations - so long as you're monitoring your weight and are adapting your diet when the results aren't what you want... then there's no dangers at all from counting wrong or rough estimating.