Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Daily Low-Carb Support > General Low-Carb
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Mon, May-02-11, 08:14
heirloom10 heirloom10 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 177
 
Plan: Kwasniewski
Stats: 120/132/115 Female 5'5"
BF:
Progress: -240%
Location: canada
Default Measuring ground beef Raw vs. ground beef Cooked

Why is there a difference between these two?

I am looking it up on fit-day and I don't understand how:

Ground beef, raw has: 254 calories, 20.0 g fat, 17.2 g protein

and

Ground beef, regular, cooked has: 276 calories, 18.6 g fat, 25.3 g protein.

Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Mon, May-02-11, 08:33
katoman's Avatar
katoman katoman is offline
Counterweight
Posts: 1,664
 
Plan: VLC/Moderate Protein
Stats: 291/251.4/150 Female 63.25"
BF:72%/62.5%/26%
Progress: 28%
Location: NW Louisiana
Default

The values are based on a per 100 gram serving.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Mon, May-02-11, 08:35
katoman's Avatar
katoman katoman is offline
Counterweight
Posts: 1,664
 
Plan: VLC/Moderate Protein
Stats: 291/251.4/150 Female 63.25"
BF:72%/62.5%/26%
Progress: 28%
Location: NW Louisiana
Default

Many of these sites use the USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference. I've previously downloaded all the data and use them in my personal spreadsheet.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Mon, May-02-11, 08:39
heirloom10 heirloom10 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 177
 
Plan: Kwasniewski
Stats: 120/132/115 Female 5'5"
BF:
Progress: -240%
Location: canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by katoman
The values are based on a per 100 gram serving.


Yes, both servings are 100 grams. But why are there different values for the same amount of meat is what I am asking.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Mon, May-02-11, 08:39
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,843
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Meat is usually weighed in oz. When you cook ground beef you'll notice a lot of liquid is lost. Some of it fat, some water. So if you cook 3.5 oz of ground beef you'll probably end up with 3 oz of cooked ground beef. It'll be the same calories if you eat the fat in the pan, if not, it'll be fewer calories.

Anyway, if you add another .5 of cooked beef to make up the difference you'll end up with more calories than when you started with the raw.

I hope I explained that well enough.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Mon, May-02-11, 08:42
katoman's Avatar
katoman katoman is offline
Counterweight
Posts: 1,664
 
Plan: VLC/Moderate Protein
Stats: 291/251.4/150 Female 63.25"
BF:72%/62.5%/26%
Progress: 28%
Location: NW Louisiana
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy LC
Meat is usually weighed in oz. When you cook ground beef you'll notice a lot of liquid is lost. Some of it fat, some water. So if you cook 3.5 oz of ground beef you'll probably end up with 3 oz of cooked ground beef. It'll be the same calories if you eat the fat in the pan, if not, it'll be fewer calories.

Anyway, if you add another .5 of cooked beef to make up the difference you'll end up with more calories than when you started with the raw.

I hope I explained that well enough.
Yes, this is what I was going to say Thank you Nancy LC.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Mon, May-02-11, 09:17
heirloom10 heirloom10 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 177
 
Plan: Kwasniewski
Stats: 120/132/115 Female 5'5"
BF:
Progress: -240%
Location: canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy LC
Meat is usually weighed in oz. When you cook ground beef you'll notice a lot of liquid is lost. Some of it fat, some water. So if you cook 3.5 oz of ground beef you'll probably end up with 3 oz of cooked ground beef. It'll be the same calories if you eat the fat in the pan, if not, it'll be fewer calories.

Anyway, if you add another .5 of cooked beef to make up the difference you'll end up with more calories than when you started with the raw.

I hope I explained that well enough.


in canada meat is usually weighed in grams and kilograms. otherwise, i think what you said pretty much makes sense. if i were to weigh raw meat and then weigh it after i cooked it, it would weigh less then, because it lost water?
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Mon, May-02-11, 11:33
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,843
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by heirloom10
in canada meat is usually weighed in grams and kilograms. otherwise, i think what you said pretty much makes sense. if i were to weigh raw meat and then weigh it after i cooked it, it would weigh less then, because it lost water?

Right. I should have said it's measured by weight and not used ounces in my example, it would have been more international.

Whenever you heat proteins beyond a certain temperature they contract and squeeze out the water. This is why meat and eggs get very dry if you overcook them (unless the meat has a lot of fat or connective tissue that turns into gelatin).
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Mon, May-02-11, 12:32
katoman's Avatar
katoman katoman is offline
Counterweight
Posts: 1,664
 
Plan: VLC/Moderate Protein
Stats: 291/251.4/150 Female 63.25"
BF:72%/62.5%/26%
Progress: 28%
Location: NW Louisiana
Default

Keep in mind also that proteins that are caramelized (seared) when heated to excess which will actually add carbs into your servings!
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Tue, May-10-11, 21:20
heirloom10 heirloom10 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 177
 
Plan: Kwasniewski
Stats: 120/132/115 Female 5'5"
BF:
Progress: -240%
Location: canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy LC
Right. I should have said it's measured by weight and not used ounces in my example, it would have been more international.

Whenever you heat proteins beyond a certain temperature they contract and squeeze out the water. This is why meat and eggs get very dry if you overcook them (unless the meat has a lot of fat or connective tissue that turns into gelatin).


Thank you!
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Tue, May-10-11, 22:46
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,843
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by katoman
Keep in mind also that proteins that are caramelized (seared) when heated to excess which will actually add carbs into your servings!

I can't quite believe that. It sounds like it would violate some laws of physics. Do you have anything to support this statement?
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Wed, May-11-11, 10:04
RobLL RobLL is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,648
 
Plan: generalized low carb
Stats: 205/180/185 Male 67
BF:31%/14?%/12%
Progress: 125%
Location: Pacific Northwest
Default

Nancy - it likely is a parallel chemical reaction to what the body itself can do with protein. Although the amount of sugar would be very low. I am not sure about this, but I sure know that I have to use a fair amount of insulin for my protein meals.
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Wed, May-11-11, 10:48
katoman's Avatar
katoman katoman is offline
Counterweight
Posts: 1,664
 
Plan: VLC/Moderate Protein
Stats: 291/251.4/150 Female 63.25"
BF:72%/62.5%/26%
Progress: 28%
Location: NW Louisiana
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy LC
I can't quite believe that. It sounds like it would violate some laws of physics. Do you have anything to support this statement?

Hmm. I gotta laugh at myself. This is one of those fallacious statements I picked up from somewhere and perpetuated a myth. I read up on caramelizing and found that my 'knowledge' is bunk! My apologies to you and everyone else.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:09.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.