How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003) • Hacker News Board

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#131

Post by refurb » Mon, May 30, 2016, 2:46 AM UTC

industriousthou wrote: post #124

thinkloop wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check this out: http://www.alive.com/health/fit-for-human-consumption/ Animals that are sick or unhealthy are separated from the herd and slaughtered independently, then sold for pet food and livestock feed. This was partly what fostered the mad cow issue. There is higher risk for illness with non-human grade food. If you don't want higher risk for your pet than child, you shouldn't feed the off-the-shelf non-human g…

Are dogs able to safely digest some foods that humans aren't? I mean, does it really need to be pointed out that dogs have different nutritional and hygiene requirements than human children?

I was going to say. A number of friends have had their dog chow down on a rotten deer corpse to no ill effect.

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#132

Post by refurb » Mon, May 30, 2016, 2:47 AM UTC

spoofball wrote: post #69

mysterypie wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was following that case closely back in 2007 because of my pet (thankfully not affected). An astonishing thing I learned was that practically every brand of cat food and dog food in North America is/was manufactured by a single company called Menu Foods in Streetsville, Ontario, Canada. The pet food "brands" don't have their own factories. They all contract it out to the same place. A few journalists remarked on th…

the majority of pet food is meat not fit for human consumption. [1] if you aren't feeding your pet meat that you eat, it's living on extreme crap. [1]: http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-industry-exposed/unfi...

My dog will eat other animal feces. His standards for "food" are pretty low.

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#133

Post by err4nt » Mon, May 30, 2016, 3:19 AM UTC

andyjdavis wrote: post #121

mysterypie wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was following that case closely back in 2007 because of my pet (thankfully not affected). An astonishing thing I learned was that practically every brand of cat food and dog food in North America is/was manufactured by a single company called Menu Foods in Streetsville, Ontario, Canada. The pet food "brands" don't have their own factories. They all contract it out to the same place. A few journalists remarked on th…

Out curiosity, is (relatively) unprocessed meat for pets available in supermarkets in north america? In Australia you can buy packets of kangaroo meat for consumption by pets as kangaroos are essentially pests in many areas. This results in a large supply of meat that has limited commercial value so most supermarkets will stock frozen packets of what is (I believe) 100% kangaroo mince for people to feed to their pets…

This is the most unique and fun thing Ive seen shared on HN in a while! It makes a ton of sense. I can speak for all of North America, but nothing like that is available in Ontario (the most populous province in Canada). We have dry food and canned meat for dogs and cats, and a new thing showing up in grocery stores in Canada, and walmarts in the US are refrigerated, 'fresh' meat pellets. They are expensive, and spoil quicker than my cat can eat it. I would jump at the chance to have 100% pure shredded meat for my pets. I bet there are lots of happy dogs and cats in AU that dont even know how good they have it :)

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#134

Post by mikekchar » Mon, May 30, 2016, 3:28 AM UTC

greendestiny_re wrote: post #122

mikekchar wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is of course different. Carbohydrates, protein and fat all undergo different metabolic pathways. Further down you are wondering why you might not have a high karma on this post. I think it's because what you have written conflates 2 issues (I suspect, though, that you aren't actually conflating them... just your writing is unclear). 500 calories from whatever source is 500 calories, when we are talking about energ…

Mikekchar, "500 calories is 500 calories" is a tautology and neither a clever writing device nor a serious argument. I've cut carbs out of my diet a few months ago, after I chewed through the 200-pound mark. I noticed I had trouble running, walking and even standing. I dropped bread, pasta and refined sugar, though I still eat fruits without restriction. The result is that I've been steadily losing weight and sheddin…

I'm glad you are losing weight (if that's what you are trying to do). However, when you change your diet comprehensively it is easy to overlook changes. For example, did you seriously measure your caloric intake before and after you changed your diet? Are you sure that you did not overlook sources of calories?

I helped a friend of mine lose weight once. His original diet consisted of a single muffin and coffee for breakfast, a subway sandwich with iced tea and one of those tiny bags of potato chips that come with the meal, and for dinner some salad and spaghetti or something. It sounds reasonable, but for the life of him he couldn't get under 220 lbs.

We went through the numbers. The muffin he was eating was 500 calories! The chips, 150 calories. The salad dressing he was eating on his salad was over 100 calories. The ice tea was 180 calories. So that's 930 calories, or nearly 1/2 of his daily requirements in just those 4 items of food.

We made a few minor substitutions to his diet (which actually increased the volume of food he was eating) and he started running 2 miles a day with me at lunch (which is worth about 200 calories a day). He was down to 160 pounds in no time. Our biggest problem was trying to make sure he didn't lose more than 2 lbs a week because that can be hard on your liver.

The thing is, if he had gone on a no carb diet and found alternatives in his diet he probably would have had the same result. No muffin. No potato chips. No ice tea. Probably substitute the salad for something with more protein.

Like I said, I'm happy if its working for you. I know a lot of people on low carb diets. Every single one of them is overweight. I have yet to meet even a single person in real life for who this strategy has worked. Mostly I see people change their diet, lose some weight when they eat more healthily and then gain it back when they mistakenly think that as long as they keep out the dreaded carbs, then they can eat whatever the heck they like without consequences.

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#135

Post by analog31 » Mon, May 30, 2016, 3:54 AM UTC

analog31 wrote: post #62

alexbock wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anyone can find a reference on the amount of CO2 produced during bread making it would be easy enough to calculate. I haven't been able to find any relevant sources except this old one [1] which mentions that the alcohol content in bread can be as high as 1.9 percent (which sounds quite high to me, but it's hard to critique when they don't explain their methodology). [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PM…

Well, all I can offer is... tonight is baking night. I will weigh the ingredients, equipment, the risen dough, and the final product.

So far...

Flour 765 g, some white and some whole wheat

Yeast 18 g, probably too much

Water 611 g, eyeballed 600 ml in old glass measuring cup

After kneading 1408 g

After first rising 1416 g

After "punch down" and second rising 1406 g

Formed into loaves, waiting to rise before putting in oven

Edit: After baking, 1271 g

I'm using a creaky old Ohaus dual pan balance, surplus from an industrial lab. The process is not entirely "quantitative" in chemistry terms because there are some minor gains and losses. I have to flour the kneading cloth to prevent sticking, some dough may get lost on my bowl, and so forth.

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#136

Post by thinkloop » Mon, May 30, 2016, 4:24 AM UTC

refurb wrote: post #132

spoofball wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the majority of pet food is meat not fit for human consumption. [1] if you aren't feeding your pet meat that you eat, it's living on extreme crap. [1]: http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-industry-exposed/unfi...

My dog will eat other animal feces. His standards for "food" are pretty low.

Lulz

Apparently this trait evolved as a way to keep the nest clean and safe during nursing of pups.

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#137

Post by xenadu02 » Mon, May 30, 2016, 4:36 AM UTC

misinformation wrote: post #28

loxs wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because different people have different metabolism. Think of it as if the body has a "target" weight. It actively tries to reach that weight and can compensate overeating (easily, by throwing away excess food) and undereating (not as easily but still can compensate a lot). This mechanism interferes heavily with your diet and that's the reason you can't easily change your weight at will by changing your diet. It c…

The body is homoeostatic and will try to repel any change in body composition and weight. While it is also correct that different people have different metabolism and gut flora that affects our calorie conversion from different foods, the answer is yes. If you count your calories reliably, you can reliably lose weight by adjusting your calorie intake to match your body. If you throw out your body's own function of re…

This also requires overriding millions of years of evolution and multiple levels of body systems all screaming "you're hungry, EAT EAT EAT".

You can kick a heroine habit by quitting. You can never stop eating. How successful do you imagine most junkies would be if the standard advice was "measure the amount of heroine you take per day and stay below your target".

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#138

Post by lsc » Mon, May 30, 2016, 4:43 AM UTC

hueving wrote: post #125

thinkloop wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great point, I have definitely noticed this in my own family. The elders are not only against "wasting" money above the minimum required for sustenance, but they get openly and visibly angry about it when someone else does. For some reason, this particular issue crosses over from "well I wouldn't do it, but to each his own", to seeing it as a fundamentally immoral act. It surprised me in the beginning. Personally I c…

>A dog is pretty much a 2 yr old child. So is a pig, so this logic really only applies to vegetarians. There is still something else that motivates meat eating people to care more for their pets.

It's pretty clear that the mental abilities or atributes of the animal is not the primary differentiation between 'something like family' and 'something like food.' The differentiation is in the emotional attachment a person has to other animals that belong to the same class as the animal in question.

I mean, I'm not saying this is right or wrong, just that this is how most people see the matter.

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#139

Post by BurningFrog » Mon, May 30, 2016, 5:02 AM UTC

Cooked food often have much more digestible calories than raw food. Because the heat breaks down complex molecules and make them easier to digest. This isn't reflected at all in these measurements.

This is why it's real hard to stay healthy on a raw food diet.

I learned this from this book, which I really recommend:

https://www.amazon.com/Catching-Fire-Cooking-Made-Human-eboo...

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#140

Post by shalmanese » Mon, May 30, 2016, 5:05 AM UTC

thinkloop wrote: post #111

lsc wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you care about your pet like you do your child, you shouldn't feed the off-the-shelf non-human grade food. This is... an interesting generational thing, I think. To most older people, the idea of caring as much for your pet as you would for a child seems viscerally wrong. They even economize on pet healthcare. but... among those younger than me, your view, as far as I can tell, seems to be the norm. The very ide…

Great point, I have definitely noticed this in my own family. The elders are not only against "wasting" money above the minimum required for sustenance, but they get openly and visibly angry about it when someone else does. For some reason, this particular issue crosses over from "well I wouldn't do it, but to each his own", to seeing it as a fundamentally immoral act. It surprised me in the beginning. Personally I c…

To provide the devil's advocate position, why does mere ownership suddenly imply a much higher duty of care? It would be morally abhorrent if we started euthanizing millions of toddlers who we couldn't find homes for yet we're fine doing the same to pets. What, morally, should be the difference between "pets we can find a home for" and "pets we can't find a home for"?