[Me Too]

I am new to counting calories, and I have a few books and also use fitday, My Plate and Sparkepople.
There doesn't seem to be any consistency in any of the numbers for the same foods.
Package foods I read the labels and go from there. Since I don't eat many processed foods, I am having a hard time getting accurate numbers for non processed foods. Sometimes as much 20 points for an orange, or 100 for a bowl of steel oats.
Whats a calorie counter to do? Round up or round down, take the lowest or highest numbers?
I'm starting a notebook of the foods I eat all the time, and also ordered dietminder to record all my information. I think I night like writing everything down, to look back on, and also take to the Dr with me, if needed.
Anyway I just try to get a certain amount of calories every day and THINK about exercising for now.

[kaplods]

Calorie counts vary tremendously because calorie counts vary in the foods that much. You've got to realize that calorie counting is an approximate measure. So, if one source say's 80, and another says 110, it looks like a wide range, but 30 calories is really a very small measure of difference.

You don't need "accurate" numbers, because there are none. Two identical looking apples can vary in calorie count by 20 or 30 calories. The only way to count the calories exactly for any piece of food, would be in a lab (and the process destroys the food). As a result, you've got to deal with the inexactness of the science.

For simplicity's sake, personally, I would decide on one calorie counting resource (one with a good reputation) and just use it. I know some folks gather three counts and average them, but I'm not sure that is any more accurate than just using one reputable source and realizing the count is at best a good estimate.

[Shannon in ATL]

Ditto what kaplods said.

I go to www.nutritiondata.com as my main source for most raw foods - I use The Daily Plate, and have entered the values from nutritiondata into the database for a lot of items.

[beerab]

I agree- use one- using three will drive you insane- I personally use sparkpeople and like it.

[zinkemomx2]

I use spark and nutritiondata for items not listed and enter them in myself

[pferde01]

The daily plate has linked up recently with Live Strong and they have "staff verified" items, since everyone can add to the database.

[JenMusic]

I use and love The Daily Plate, but I don't trust the "Verified" items any more than anything else. I've seen more than one Verified item that was wrong - I had chosen the correct item, had the package right in front of me, and the nutrition information was wrong.

[BlueToBlue]

One cause of discrepancies with fruit and veggies is the size of the fruit. If one source assumes that an orange weights 4 oz and another source assumes that an orange weighs 5 oz, those two sources will report different calories for an orange. I weight all my fruits and veggies and log calories for them by the ounce.

Another cause of discrepancies can be fiber. Calories from fiber (about 4 calories per gram) don't count because your body can't absorb it. But the FDA doesn't regulate whether or not food manufacturers have to include fiber in calorie counts. So if you are looking two cans of pinto beans from two different food manufacturers and one counts the calories in fiber and one doesn't, the two cans will show different calories for the same amount of beans.

[Priscatip]

I did not know that about fiber calories, actually I'd never heard of fiber calories. Is that what people mean when they say celery is negative calories? Fascinating.

[sweetshauna]

True true. I agree with all that is said above. Here's my two cents:

I use the Daily Plate. I know that many things in there are wrong, but I think overall it helps me to stay conscious of minimizing my calories so that I can lose weight.

For example, yesterday I had baked ziti for dinner. Then when I logged it in I found out (to my horror) that I ate about 900 calories worth of ziti! So now I know EXACTLY how much a pasta dish is damaging to a weight loss plan- and hence I will aviod it more than if some book told me not to eat pasta.

In addition, calorie counting has made me hyper-aware of portion sizes. I realized that my mind is totally totally warped when it comes on to its conception of what an acceptable portion size should look like. I'm trying to re-train myself, and calorie tracking helps me to be aware of the nutritional value of a HEALTHY portion size. For example, many people don't realize it, but something as wholesome and healthy as corn can be very carb heavy- so it would be better to have a big serving of broccoli with a small serving of corn, than a big serving of corn and a small serving of broccoli.

So while I realize that even though I may have logged 1,200 calories when I did in fact eat 1,600 calories, the point is that if I WASN'T calorie counting I would have probably ate like 3,000 calories!

Of course for some people 300 may be a make or break situation, but for me, I think counting is just about retraining your mind about the nutritional value of different foods and also about portioning. After all- I don't plan to count for the rest of my life- its just a good tool to help my transition to a healthier me. Once I get there I'll know subconsciously stuff like how much rice I should eat for dinner, whether or not I should have rice and oatmeal in one day, how to balance my daily menus to minimize cholesterol intake, and stuff like that.

Good luck with calorie counting!

[JayEll]

I think a lot of people make this harder than they need to...

It's like, when we were gaining weight, we never gave a second's thought to what we were eating. Now, on a weight reduction plan, suddenly we want to know to the third decimal place.

I agree with the other posters--choose one source and stick with it. You'll never be exact with this, and you don't need to be.

Jay