One thing with the nutrition data base information is that the results it provides are still only an estimate. They sometimes provide different stats for the time of year the food was harvested. Just as a few examples of possible variations, there are some foods that have more calories/carbs harvested later in the season, than if harvested earlier; a dry growing season will result in a smaller but sweeter (more carbs per weight) fruit, a wet growing season will result in a larger, juicier, but less sweet fruit. If the fruit is out of season and been stored for months, it will have lost some of it's moisture, meaning it will still have the same amount of sugar and carbs as when it was harvested, but will weigh a little less.
The variety of that food can make a difference - I'm sure you're not using grapes because of the carb content, but just as an example cotton candy grapes have nearly twice as many calories and carbs as regular green grapes.
Exact serving size will make a difference - usually the serving is measured in grams, or by volume (sometimes it's a cup of 1/2" cubes, sometimes a cup of the pureed food - very different amounts of food, given that the cup of pureed food will not have the air spaces that the cup of 1/2" cubes will have).
Using the example of an avocado, the stats will based on a certain type of avocado (Florida avocados have different stats from California avocados), and that the flesh of the avocado weighs a certain number of grams (weighed after the seed and skin have been removed). But there's also stats based on the average of all commercial varieties of avocado - each category of avocado provides slightly different stats.
If you want your carb grams and calories to be as accurate as possible, and not just somewhere in the ballpark, then weighing and measuring everything will be necessary, as well as being sure that the category of each food you enter is the one you're eating, as accurately as possible.
Even then it's not going to be exact - the oldest nutrition stats are based on calculations determined 100 (or more) years ago. Some have not been updated to reflect newer hybrid or GMO varieties of produce, or changes in livestock feeding practices that could change the fat content (and therefore the calorie content) of the food. For example, pork is far different from what it was even 50 years ago - they're now feeding pigs a much lower carb feed, to reduce the amount of marbling in the meat. Who knows what other changes in livestock production, and changes in crop production have made? Many changes have never been accounted for in the nutrition stats, unless done by some independent producer - Eggland's Best eggs proudly proclaims that their eggs are lower in cholesterol than other eggs, because they have done the independent research to determine that they're different from standard nutrition stats. Just to give you an idea of the slight differences since the official USDA stats were established, some of the stats Eggland's uses for "regular eggs" on their website are different from the USDA stats for regular eggs.
~~~
I wasn't really clear on what plan you were using - your profile said you were doing Atkins, but in some of your posts you didn't seem clear on whether you're counting total carbs or net carbs. Now I see you say you're referencing NANY, which deducts fiber to result in net carbs. I wasn't sure why you were using two different carb count sources (Westman vs Diet Doctor - one saying to count total carbs, the other saying to deduct fiber). Atkins original plan is based on total carbs, NANY is based on net. Even if you're using NANY as your reference guide (the basic concept of LC is still the same as the '72 version), you can still decide to do it using total carbs. Even if fiber supposedly doesn't count, everyone is different, and your own experience is what matters. I'm still not exactly sure whether you're using total or net - and it doesn't really matter which one you use. What matters is picking one way of counting your carbs, and sticking to that way, and deciding on a carb count to stay under using that method.
~~~~
As far as calories, I know I referenced BMR as the number you don't want to go under, and made assumptions (based on the slight reduction in BMR between age 60 and 80, and your out of range age) about your probable BMR. What counts though is your own experience about calorie level and what minimum and maximum you need to continue to lose weight. So you're right to want to find an effective calorie level, the BMR stuff is just a place to begin trying to figure out your best calorie level for weight loss.
Quote:
|
I lost 10 pounds - give or take a 2 pound weight loss or gain - since Nov 21 when I climbed back on the wagon.
|
Question though - you said you lost 10 lbs since Nov 21st. Today is Jan 22nd, so that's 10 lbs in 2 months - actually not a bad average per week, especially given your age and mobility issues. I know it's much more difficult to lose weight as you get older. (I'm almost 20 years younger than you are, a little more mobile, and it's continually become more difficult to lose weight as the years have gone by, so I don't expect it to get any easier over the next 2 decades, assuming I live that long.)
My question though - when did the weight loss stop? If it's only been a few weeks, it's possible that this is just a temporary stall that will correct itself if you continue on with your previous course, once your body stabilizes and decides that it's ok to let go of more weight.
Just some of my thoughts on the matter though - take or leave any of my comments as you see fit.
Type "Carbs in vegetable x" into your Google Search Bar, the results at top are Total Carbs from the USDA Nutrition Database, with a drop down menu of various serving sizes. Then if you want the total and fiber, click on "more at" and a full nutrition label pops up. Ten years ago, the Atkins company sent a book with total and net carbs in their starter kit, but the internet has leaped beyond my old paper and pencil method. If you have a copy of the "famous" 2002 DANDR edition...that has total and net in the back.
Linear Mode
