Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

People are bad at reporting what they eat. That's a problem for dietary research

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 470 posts

Re: People are bad at reporting what they eat. That's a problem for dietary research

#91

Post by yodsanklai »

aziaziazi wrote: post #29

For those that "track and weight everything" (how ?) do you manage ?: - sauces you make yourself? I often mix some different oils, mustard, seeds, miso, bit of leamon juice and spices… but weighting and logging everything will take 3x the time to do the sauce itself - different cooking time in one receive : oignons going first, tomato sauce in the middle and parsley at the end (but still cook a bit with residual heat…

I suppose it depends what goals you're pursuing with your tracking. If it's simply losing weight, you can focus on the things with lots of calories in them. Oil, sugar, processed foods. Tomatoes, cucumber and lemon juice shouldn't be an issue.

Re: People are bad at reporting what they eat. That's a problem for dietary research

#92

Post by leidenfrost »

varispeed wrote: post #56
jjcob wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've done that for weight loss, so I focussed on calories only. That was pretty easy: - while cooking, you weigh every ingredient. Either I just take photos of the scale with my phone, or I write it on a sheet of paper. - when cooking is done, you weigh the total food (easiest if you know the weight of your pots) - when eating, you weigh your portions After some time, you realise that you need to be precise for some…

How do you calculate calories?

Keep in mind that I calculate enough to achieve caloric deficit. Not to reach an exact number.

I also leave the nutrient part on just eating a varied diet, with lots of whole foods.

I personally use MyFitnessPal, weigh the calorie significant food (e.g. the Protein, starches, fat-rich vegetables and fatty sauces) and establish a rough estimate about the calories.

I try to maintain the error an order of magnitude lower than my estimate. That's why I don't bother weighing leafy and "watery" vegetables (e.g. spinach, letucce or cucurbits). Also, I try to keep an eye of sauces like Mayonnaise, but I usually relax on Mustard (I dunno where you live, but mustard here tends to be low-fat by default).

That error can be easily burnt by the casual movement we do in the day.

Re: People are bad at reporting what they eat. That's a problem for dietary research

#93

Post by 2cynykyl »

everdrive wrote: post #81

A lot of people seem to have a purely emotional relationship with resources which logic doesn't seem to be able to penetrate. Food and finances seem similar here. For years I tried to get my wife to stick to a grocery budget. That is, we have $n per week for all groceries. She'd blow badly over the limit every time. "But we needed [food]" or "These were toiletries, so they don't _count_ as groceries." Ultimately we n…

Im reading Sapiens at the moment and one statement really got my attention: human society is a marvel, but individually we are embarrassingly similar to Chimps. This mental model really helps put put so much behavior into context, like resource hogging and the hoarding instinct, despite obvious surplus of everything everywhere at all times.

Re: People are bad at reporting what they eat. That's a problem for dietary research

#94

Post by Ekaros »

djtango wrote: post #43
oersted wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the way we measure calories very interesting: place the food in a metal box filled with oxygen, immerse the box in water, make the food explode so that it combusts completely, and finally measure how much the water heats up. Rather crude and fun, but that's it, see Bomb Calorimeter. I guess it makes sense in retrospect, how else would you do it? They usually just measure standard basic ingredients, then you ro…

I'm not convinced calorimetry is particularly useful for any nuanced diet planning. We can't eat wood (or coal) but they're very calorific when measured via bomb calorimetry.

I was thinking of methane as input. But what about it as output? How much does leave the system? And should this not be in calories "out" column, but I don't think that is usually counted there...

Re: People are bad at reporting what they eat. That's a problem for dietary research

#95

Post by nraf »

skerit wrote: post #61
drchiu wrote: post #44

Another way to look at it is that tracking what you eat is very difficult. Currently trying to lose a few pounds and doing calorie tracking. Practically carry a scale and a calorie tracking app with me. About once a day there's still some "estimation" involved due to the fact that all the ingredients are mixed together.

Indeed. I also tracked everything I ate for a long time, many years ago. As soon as you eat something made by someone else you're basically guessing.

The estimating is often enough to make better choices.

I know I’m not going to be able to eat my main, a couple slices of pizza, one or two entrees and a dessert with only 800 calories left in my budget.

Sure, I might be somewhat off in my estimate, but in practice, I might forgo the entrees and dessert (or share a bite from someone else), set some of my main aside to take home, and have a slice of pizza.

Re: People are bad at reporting what they eat. That's a problem for dietary research

#96

Post by Izkata »

beezlebroxxxxxx wrote: post #70
aziaziazi wrote: post #29

For those that "track and weight everything" (how ?) do you manage ?: - sauces you make yourself? I often mix some different oils, mustard, seeds, miso, bit of leamon juice and spices… but weighting and logging everything will take 3x the time to do the sauce itself - different cooking time in one receive : oignons going first, tomato sauce in the middle and parsley at the end (but still cook a bit with residual heat…

Counting works for people because it quantifies their food intake. For many people, that's an effective way to overcome a learned idea that portions should be huge, or that feeling hungry has to be addressed immediately, or that feeling "full" has to be constant. It's not perfect, and I don't recommend it to people with an ED history; however, after about a month or 2 of doing it, it can really change how you look at…

Yep, it doesn't particularly matter if something that's actually 212 or 198 is entered as 200. Sometimes you'll be slightly over, sometimes slightly below - just try to be accurate and these small mistakes average out.

Typically I figure out the actual weight/volume once or twice to get a sense of how much it is, then just eyeball it most of the time and go for the same amount as last time I measured.

Re: People are bad at reporting what they eat. That's a problem for dietary research

#97

Post by crazygringo »

jjcob wrote: post #52
aziaziazi wrote: post #29

For those that "track and weight everything" (how ?) do you manage ?: - sauces you make yourself? I often mix some different oils, mustard, seeds, miso, bit of leamon juice and spices… but weighting and logging everything will take 3x the time to do the sauce itself - different cooking time in one receive : oignons going first, tomato sauce in the middle and parsley at the end (but still cook a bit with residual heat…

I've done that for weight loss, so I focussed on calories only. That was pretty easy: - while cooking, you weigh every ingredient. Either I just take photos of the scale with my phone, or I write it on a sheet of paper. - when cooking is done, you weigh the total food (easiest if you know the weight of your pots) - when eating, you weigh your portions After some time, you realise that you need to be precise for some…

Exactly this. You just weigh every ingredient. It doesn't matter if it's a sauce or what. If it's something premade (like tomato sauce) you use the calories on the packaging. If it's a raw ingredient you look it up.

I never bothered with weighing the final result or portions, instead I just always divvied up the final product into equal individual portions and divided by the total number of portions. That works well if you freeze them.

Of course, all the calculation is a tremendous amount of work. I did it when I needed to lose weight and only did it for a couple of months. But it definitely "calibrated" my understanding of calories -- e.g. non-starchy veggies have barely any at all, while cheese and butter and oil can easily double the calories in a dish.

Re: People are bad at reporting what they eat. That's a problem for dietary research

#98

Post by robertlagrant »

beezlebroxxxxxx wrote: post #70
aziaziazi wrote: post #29

For those that "track and weight everything" (how ?) do you manage ?: - sauces you make yourself? I often mix some different oils, mustard, seeds, miso, bit of leamon juice and spices… but weighting and logging everything will take 3x the time to do the sauce itself - different cooking time in one receive : oignons going first, tomato sauce in the middle and parsley at the end (but still cook a bit with residual heat…

Counting works for people because it quantifies their food intake. For many people, that's an effective way to overcome a learned idea that portions should be huge, or that feeling hungry has to be addressed immediately, or that feeling "full" has to be constant. It's not perfect, and I don't recommend it to people with an ED history; however, after about a month or 2 of doing it, it can really change how you look at…

> I don't recommend it to people with an ED history

Your daily reminder that ED means more than one thing.

Re: People are bad at reporting what they eat. That's a problem for dietary research

#99

Post by cies »

varispeed wrote: post #56
jjcob wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've done that for weight loss, so I focussed on calories only. That was pretty easy: - while cooking, you weigh every ingredient. Either I just take photos of the scale with my phone, or I write it on a sheet of paper. - when cooking is done, you weigh the total food (easiest if you know the weight of your pots) - when eating, you weigh your portions After some time, you realise that you need to be precise for some…

How do you calculate calories?

https://cronometer.com this is what nutritionists use.

It tracks not only calories, but also macros and micros.

Re: People are bad at reporting what they eat. That's a problem for dietary research

#100

Post by crazygringo »

aziaziazi wrote: post #29

For those that "track and weight everything" (how ?) do you manage ?: - sauces you make yourself? I often mix some different oils, mustard, seeds, miso, bit of leamon juice and spices… but weighting and logging everything will take 3x the time to do the sauce itself - different cooking time in one receive : oignons going first, tomato sauce in the middle and parsley at the end (but still cook a bit with residual heat…

> - sauces you make yourself?… but weighting and logging everything will take 3x the time to do the sauce itself

Yup, it will. Nobody said tracking nutrients was quick.

> - different cooking time in one receive : oignons going first, tomato sauce in the middle and parsley at the end (but still cook a bit with residual heat)

Cooking time doesn't matter for macronutrients.

> - Leftovers nutrients decrease with time

They don't for macronutrients.

> - different species/cultivation methods like the rustic small and dense cucumber from your neighbor and the spongy one from the supermarket in January

The differences don't really matter for calorie purposes. High-caloric things don't vary in density meaningfully.

You seem to be confusing tracking macronutrients (carbs, fats, protein) with micronutrients (vitamin C etc.). People track macros, generally to lose weight. I've never heard of anyone tracking micros. I don't think it's even possible.

Post reply on HN