|
Author: kaiserwil
Date: 07-15-04 12:42
I know companies aren't supposed to lie about nutritional information but there's a lot of things that aren't supposed to happen in the world. My question is this:
A Healthy Choice can of soup has 120 calories per serving, two servings in a can, a serving being 1 cup.
A can of Chunky Soup has 110 calories per serving, two servings in a can, a serving being 1 cup.
This wouldn't bother me except that the healthy choice can is drastically smaller than the chunky soup can. How can they both contain 2 cups? The Chunky Soup is way better and if one can of that is 20 less calories than the only vaguely good Healthy Choice, why would I bother with the healthy choice?
How many ounces are a in a cup? 8? The Healthy Choice is 15oz and the Chunky Soup is 18.6. If a cup is 8oz then neither contain 2 servings. Argh.
210/176/170
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: miranda
Date: 07-15-04 13:12
If you look closely at the labels, they probably say "approximately" two servings. A lot of products do this, and it's very annoying when you're trying to count calories. So break out the calculator while you curse under your breath.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
miranda
230/169.5/145
"I don't need to compromise my principles, because they don't have the slightest bearing on what happens to me anyway."--Bill Watterson, "Calvin and Hobbes"
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: Doug
Date: 07-15-04 13:25
If you look carefully the label probably says "about" 2 servings. This usually translates into about 2.1 - 2.4 servings. I have never seen it be less than 2.
To figure it out I take the weight of the soup in ounces, divide by 16 to get pounds, divide by 2.2046 to get kg. Assuming soup has about the same specific density as water the weight in kilograms will equal the volume in liters. So multiple by by 1.06 to get the actual volume in quarts and then multiple by 4 to get the volume in cups, which is the number of servings.
If you work through all the constants this simplifies to:
servings = soup weight in ounces / 8.32
So if the soup weighs 18.9 ounces there are 18.9/8.32 = 2.27 servings.
I have been told that anyone but an engineer would just pour the can into a measuring cup to figure this out but what is the fun in that?
And why do I need to guess at the specific density of soup to figure out how many calories are in a single serving can?
So no, the label does not lie in a technical sense. It is just misleading.
I heard a few months ago that the FDA was getting tired of these sort of games being played by food manufacturers and was going to change the regulations to prevent it if the companies did not stop. I hope they take action sooner rather than later.
Doug 272/164/170
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: LeeV
Date: 07-15-04 15:13
Good grief. Just eat the whole can and be done with it.
lol
220/175/130
Began New Lifestyle June 18, 2004
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: Doug
Date: 07-15-04 16:10
I do eat the whole can, as do most people. But a most of them are eating 15% more calories than they think they are because of this sort of misleading labeling.
This is one reason so many people eat more than they think they are and fail to lose weight.
It is not ethical on the part of the food companies and we should not let them get away with it. The whole point of labeling is to allow consumers who care to make better choices.
The solution on our side is to treat calories as a relative number and just eat less until we start losing wieght. But we still need accurate information to make the best possible choices.
Doug 272/164/170
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: LeeV
Date: 07-15-04 16:22
Oh, I agree on the information part, it ticks me off too.
I was just teasin ya ;)
220/175/130
Began New Lifestyle June 18, 2004
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: Donna
Date: 07-15-04 16:43
My beef was between Chunky and Progresso soups. I posted about it on here but was told just measure it, so I did. My findings were that although the chunky soup was taller than the progresso they had the same 2 cups even worth. The progresso soup had less "broth" while the chunky had a lot more. Could be why it weighs more? Don't know but I do know that they measured the same for me and as for the taste test well..... progresso won by a landslide and most of their soups have less cals than Chunky too.
~Donna~
146~146~135
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: Jenn
Date: 07-15-04 16:49
""To figure it out I take the weight of the soup in ounces, divide by 16 to get pounds, divide by 2.2046 to get kg. Assuming soup has about the same specific density as water the weight in kilograms will equal the volume in liters. So multiple by by 1.06 to get the actual volume in quarts and then multiple by 4 to get the volume in cups, which is the number of servings.""
ok doug i am a little confused by your math here.... why do you go from english (ounces and pounds) to metric (K and L) and then back to english (cups)???? it seems to me like your math would be simpler if you stayed in one system
also you made the assumption that soup had the same specific density as water.... but most soups (unless its a broth) are WAY more dense than water.... its all the thickeners added because we like stuff that "sticks to the spoon" and "sticks to your ribs" (hmmmm maybe the reason why as a nation we are mostly overweight?!?!?!?!?!) anyways... this assumption could verywell throw off your calculations by (im guessing) up to about 7-9% (it would vary by brand, viscosity, ingredients ad neauseam) and then what about the soups where it says 1 serving equals 6 ozs.... it just messes with your equations even more ;)
and why would a train driver want to go through all that work just to have soup.... he would probably just put it in a thermous and go.... of course Scotty would just have the computer brew him up some..... did you ever notice that scotty was the ONLY plump one is Star Trek TOS?????????? ;)
all that said... what ever trips your trigger doug!!!!!!
hugs
Jenn
(p.s. i minored in math in college :) LOL)
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: miranda
Date: 07-15-04 17:08
Doug is an engineer. He can't help himself. I come from a family of engineers, and have worked with engineers, and they're all like this. Just humor him. Nod politely and go about your business. Whatever you do, don't ask another question. That's what I do with my engineers. To be fair, my engineers generally have quite a bit to say about my profession--attorney--but I usually can't understand them, so it doesn't bother me much.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
miranda
230/169.5/145
"I don't need to compromise my principles, because they don't have the slightest bearing on what happens to me anyway."--Bill Watterson, "Calvin and Hobbes"
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: Donna
Date: 07-15-04 17:56
You made my head spin with that one lol! Wow, i'm just speechless =O Cool!
~Donna~
146~146~135
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: LeeV
Date: 07-15-04 19:25
That's why I said we should just forget and eat it. Or eat it and forget it :)
220/175/130
Began New Lifestyle June 18, 2004
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: sg
Date: 07-15-04 19:28
that was utterly amazing, doug. rock on.
why do all the math when you can measure it out in a cup? Because you "can"!! (sorry)
sg
190/157/130
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Author: Gary
Date: 07-16-04 11:08
There is probally an acceptable margin of error that is allowed, but since most of us tend to underestimate what we eat anyhow it would probally be good to round your calories up (like if something you eat is supposed to be 190 calories, just figure it to be 200 calories) when figuring your daily calorie intake.
Gary
http://home.earthlink.net/~gklentprs/360to180.html
Gary 360/175/175
|
|
Reply To This Message
|
|
Click here
for a great cookbook
with quick & healthy
recipes
Weight Lifting
For Absolute Beginners:
Illustrated Guide
CLICK HERE
|
