# chicken breast, thigh, drumstick etc.



## FliPSkYTraK (Mar 12, 2008)

is it okay to just get the nutrition facts of a chicken from a website(calorieking/fitday) instead of getting it from its nutrition label?cause the facts on the label is when it's raw and i weigh my food after broiling it which i can get from the website.or is it different facts(chicken) from every source?


----------



## tucker01 (Mar 12, 2008)

From the label is your best bet.


----------



## Biggly (Mar 12, 2008)

A generic database is just that, whilst a label is specific to the item.

Also there's a considerable difference between chicken breast and darker bits of chicken but cooking method is the biggest variable.

Beware any chicken that is labelled as suitable for rotary ovens (rotisserie or however you spell it) as they're injected with fat to keep them juicey. Generally though a chicken is a chicken so you're not going to get a huge difference as long as you've identified the right part of the chicken (inc with or without skin) and the cooking method, which in your case is boiling which isn't going to add anything. If you were frying in batter you'd pretty much treble the calories but boiled, stir-fried or grilled then chicken is chicken really.

You'll never get 100% accuracy and life would be miserable if you did! The main thing is to get an average overview and ensure you're not missing things such as liquid calories (coffee creamer, booze etc). Unless you're eating the same thing every day you'll find your calories bounce around by 100 or so even when you're being pretty damn strict, so don't sweat it, just go by the label or the database, whichever is more convenient. 

Obviously if it IS a rotary-ready pack, stuffed with herbs and butter or battered or something there'll be a major difference but 20-40 calories or so isn't worth worrying about.

The other big difference is a raw label is likely to include the skin, which is around 100 calories per half a chicken breast (one side of a chicken) but if you're removing the skin before cooking then obviously take that into account.

I'm just glad to see someone counting their calories, seeing as there's been a spate of "hey, calories don't matter" or "why bother counting?" posts lately!



B.


----------



## tucker01 (Mar 12, 2008)

Biggly said:


> I'm just glad to see someone counting their calories, seeing as there's been a spate of "hey, calories don't matter" or "why bother counting?" posts lately!
> 
> 
> 
> B.



It is all about evaluating the situation.  Not everyone is here to be a bodybuilder, some people are just looking to live a healthier life.  It is better to take small steps, and have success, then to overwhelm them and fail.

I personally don't count calories anymore, unless I plan on going on a strict cut.  I have a good idea on what I am putting into my body though.  Diet should be a simple thing, only complicate things where necessary.


----------



## Biggly (Mar 12, 2008)

> I have a good idea on what I am putting into my body though



And how did you learn?

One of the biggest reasons I urge people to count their calories is because most don't have a freakin' clue what they're eating, they don't know where most of their calories are coming from and they just seem to have the mantra such as "more protein" or "fat is bad for you" etc.

Identifying what they're actually eating usually makes things clearer for people rather than more complicated.

How can you be on a 'calorie controlled diet' if you don't know how many calories you're attempting to control? Many people end up reducing portions or whatever without realising they're already consuming too _few _calories and that's their problem.

I agree if you've counted for awhile you get to know different foods and can roughly judge, same as if you've been driving for awhile you get to know your speed without having to look at the speedo. Saying "speed doesn't matter" or "you don't have to look, you'll get the hang of it" for a learner driver is not helpful. Speedometers are there for a reason, calories are labelled for a reason, both are useful tools and worth using until you don't have to.



B.


----------



## tucker01 (Mar 12, 2008)

Biggly said:


> And how did you learn?
> 
> One of the biggest reasons I urge people to count their calories is because most don't have a freakin' clue what they're eating, they don't know where most of their calories are coming from and they just seem to have the mantra such as "more protein" or "fat is bad for you" etc.
> 
> ...



by doing it 

No doubt, I am not saying counting calories is not important to get to in the learning process.  Keeping things simple with diet, just like any kid in school you don't start out with trig right away, you start with number basics, and work your way to a level of being able to understand Trig.  I feel that is the same way for diet as well.  So many people are uneducated
about what they are putting in there bodies, almost a complete over haul on what they think is right needs to be done..

Just my $0.02


----------



## AKIRA (Mar 12, 2008)

IainDaniel said:


> It is all about evaluating the situation.  Not everyone is here to be a bodybuilder, some people are just looking to live a healthier life.  *It is better to take small steps, and have success, then to overwhelm them and fail.*
> 
> I personally don't count calories anymore, unless I plan on going on a strict cut.  I have a good idea on what I am putting into my body though.  Diet should be a simple thing, only complicate things where necessary.



I am so glad another moderator said that.  I know of one that may say that, but present themselves another way..


----------



## Biggly (Mar 12, 2008)

> So many people are uneducated
> about what they are putting in there bodies..



Exactly! 


B.


----------

