# weighing after or before



## nechcs (Apr 17, 2008)

i searched this up but i am still confused, i weigh all my food i dont measure inless its a liquid.  When i looked at the nutrional information on my checken brest it said 16 grams of protien in 100g of chickenbrest so i eat 200g of chicken (measured before its cooked) but after it is cooked it weighs about 100g so i was wondering if i was getting 16g of protien or 32g of protien?

and another thing i was reading that rice is suposed to be weigh after cooked that dosent make any sense?


----------



## VanessaNicole (Apr 17, 2008)

You should measure your meat before it's cooked.

Where are you getting your nutritional values for your rice? Get them from the package which will list them either as dry rice only or as both dry and steamed.


----------



## Built (Apr 17, 2008)

I weighed out some raw chicken breast, and then again poached. 

100g of raw chicken breast weighs 75g after I poach it. How does yours weigh 50g? Do you dry the hell out of it?


----------



## Irons77 (Apr 17, 2008)

Weight it after you cook it


----------



## VanessaNicole (Apr 17, 2008)

Irons77 said:


> Weight it after you cook it



Not if your source of nutritional information is from the package.

Your package weighs it as packaged. Raw.


----------



## VanessaNicole (Apr 17, 2008)

Built said:


> I weighed out some raw chicken breast, and then again poached.
> 
> 100g of raw chicken breast weighs 75g after I poach it. How does yours weigh 50g? Do you dry the hell out of it?



Maybe he's eating breast fillets?


----------



## Built (Apr 17, 2008)

Same difference.


----------



## VanessaNicole (Apr 17, 2008)

Note to self: read posts more thoroughly before posting.

I thought you were wondering why his were half the size of yours.

Good point, though.

Poaching probably retains a lot more water than, say, grilling.


----------



## Built (Apr 17, 2008)

A little, sure. But they still drop weight. I've tried it after pan-frying and the same thing. I entered both into my custom fitday so I can weigh it out either way.


----------



## Irons77 (Apr 17, 2008)

So it gets smaller after you cook it, right?  So if I cook a 8-oz breast and it weights 7-oz after cooking it, I'm getting the same amount of protein?


----------



## Built (Apr 17, 2008)

No, the protein magically disappears... 



Yes, it's the same. And 8 ounces raw generally turns into about 6 ounces cooked, at least for boneless, skinless chicken boob.


----------



## Irons77 (Apr 17, 2008)

Damn I been screwing myself out of protein I hate chicken boobs


----------



## VanessaNicole (Apr 17, 2008)

Why don't you find a protein source you don't hate?


----------



## Built (Apr 17, 2008)

No kidding!

There's a WORLD of food out there!

That being said, chicken flavours up pretty nice. Tried any sauces?


----------



## nechcs (Apr 17, 2008)

ok thats what i thaught but i was reading another thread and some one said after but i guess before is the way to go. The way i was cooking my chicken brests was i would sear the out sides in a hot pan then bake them if any of u where intrested


----------



## Irons77 (Apr 17, 2008)

It was a joke, that is mainly what I eat other then tuna and a little red meat


----------



## Built (Apr 17, 2008)

I eat a LOT of red meat. 

Love it love it love it bloody and rare. Mmm....


----------



## KentDog (Apr 17, 2008)

Weigh after cooking; water has no calories.


----------



## Irons77 (Apr 17, 2008)

Built said:


> I eat a LOT of red meat.
> 
> Love it love it love it bloody and rare. Mmm....



There is a saying to that i use but not here. I love rare too


----------



## VanessaNicole (Apr 17, 2008)

KentDog said:


> Weigh after cooking; water has no calories.



Yes, but you will eat more calories if you eat 100g of cooked chicken than you would if you ate 100g of raw chicken.


----------



## Biggly (Apr 18, 2008)

The main difference between cooked and raw meat is that, depending on the cooking method, cooked meat is likely to contain more or less fat. So in terms of _calories _cooking can make a big difference. 

Where the amino acids of protein are concerned it's not going to do much.

Half a chicken breast is about 30 grams of protein, regardless of if you stew it, grill it, fry it or eat it raw. For calories grilling is best, frying worse but it won't make much difference to the protein.



B.


----------



## nadirmg (Apr 18, 2008)

one thing i don't like about fitday is some of the things aren't measurable by weight.  only volume.  sweet potatoes, for instance.  i cut a sweet potato in half, weigh it and it's 5.5 oz.  so... i go into fitday to enter the weight in and lo' and behold i've got my choice of gallons, liters, cups, and fl. oz.  but no weight choices.  

any ideas?


----------



## tucker01 (Apr 18, 2008)

Irons77 said:


> There is a saying to that i use but not here. I love rare too




Knock the horns of and wipe the ass!


----------



## VanessaNicole (Apr 18, 2008)

Biggly said:


> The main difference between cooked and raw meat is that, depending on the cooking method, cooked meat is likely to contain more or less fat. So in terms of _calories _cooking can make a big difference.
> 
> Where the amino acids of protein are concerned it's not going to do much.
> 
> ...




If you poached or grilled a chicken breast with no oil a *tiny* bit of fat might leave the chicken during cooking but I don't think it would be that big of a difference.

But let's say your diet calls for 100g of chicken breast. There is (according to people on this thread's experiences) a 25%-50% decrease in weight after cooking.

So if you measure after cooking, you will add 25%-50% more calories to your planned intake of calories from chicken.

Right?


----------



## Built (Apr 18, 2008)

VanessaNicole said:


> If you poached or grilled a chicken breast with no oil a *tiny* bit of fat might leave the chicken during cooking but I don't think it would be that big of a difference.
> 
> But let's say your diet calls for 100g of chicken breast. There is (according to people on this thread's experiences) a 25%-50% decrease in weight after cooking.
> 
> ...



Not if you account for the difference.

I don't always weigh before I cook it - usually I cook it up and then weigh it - but I know it loses 25% of its weight when I cook it so I take that into account. My 300g poached chicken breast is really 400g raw. I just keep two different entries in fitday. MUCH easier.


----------



## BulkMeUp (Apr 18, 2008)

weight before ..after .. cooked.. raw... AARGH!!

Why dont you work out your requirements based on the cooked values and be done with it? 

Nutrition Facts and Information for Chicken, broilers or fryers, breast, meat only, cooked, stewed


----------



## Biggly (Apr 18, 2008)

> one thing i don't like about fitday is some of the things aren't measurable by weight. only volume. sweet potatoes, for instance. i cut a sweet potato in half, weigh it and it's 5.5 oz. so...any ideas?



Dunno about Fitday but in Biggly I'd just enter one SP and for units enter .5, ie half.



> So if you measure after cooking, you will add 25%-50% more calories to your planned intake of calories from chicken.
> 
> Right?



No, I'm referring to the _protein _element. The calorie aspect is indeed dependent upon cooking method. If you use something such as a Foreman grill you'll see even a lean chicken breast will shed quite a lot of fat.

Obviously if you stick it in breadcrumbs and fry it there's a difference in calories - but not protein.

The difference between cooking methods isn't such a biggie for chicken as it's pretty damn lean anyway. It makes more of a difference with beef or lamb for example.

In another life I was a regional manager for the facilities company that dealt with Asda/Walmart and I know, for a fact, that the chickens used in the rotisserie are actually injected with fat before they are delivered to the store - as that cooking method dries out so much fat. Which is the whole point of it really...



B.


----------



## KentDog (Apr 18, 2008)

VanessaNicole said:


> Yes, but you will eat more calories if you eat 100g of cooked chicken than you would if you ate 100g of raw chicken.


Agreed, but that is not his question. Essentially he is asking what weighing method (weighing before cooking or after) is more accurate to the nutritional facts label.

I am under the impression that to determine the nutritional facts on foods, the foods are burned, and the amount of energy created from it determines how many calories the food contains. By this theory, water will create no calories, so that extra water weight in meats before cooking is just that; it should not be factored into your overall intake.


----------



## Plateau_Max (Apr 19, 2008)

There is a loss of both fat and water when you cook the chicken but it will not change the value of the protein.  Weigh it before you cook it because that what the nutritional value is meant for.  The manufacturers don't know how you're going to cook it so they can't account for that.

The calorie value is going to be different but the protein will not.  Also if you really want to be 100% sure just buy the pre-cooked lean chicken breasts in the frozen section.  For those you just let them thaw and heat up a tad and you're good to go.


----------



## VanessaNicole (Apr 23, 2008)

KentDog said:


> Agreed, but that is not his question. Essentially he is asking what weighing method (weighing before cooking or after) is more accurate to the nutritional facts label.
> 
> I am under the impression that to determine the nutritional facts on foods, the foods are burned, and the amount of energy created from it determines how many calories the food contains. By this theory, water will create no calories, so that extra water weight in meats before cooking is just that; it should not be factored into your overall intake.



You're right, water has no nutritional value.

However, a fresh apricot weighs at least 5 times as much as a dried one.

So 8 ounces of fresh aprocot has 60 calories. 8 ounces of dried apricot has 306 calories.

So if your package list the nutritional content of dried apricots and you count them as fresh you will be sorely mistaken.

A package of raw chicken will you give you the nutritional value by weight of raw chicken, although the nutritional value by weight of cooked chicken is a different value.


----------



## Balin (Apr 23, 2008)

The USDA National Nutrient Database has both cooked and  raw data. 

http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/search/


----------

