Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Calories Chicken raw vs Cooked

  • 14-09-2016 12:42pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 96 ✭✭


    Trying to figure out my calories as best I can.

    On the chicken packet it says:

    100g Raw: 106 calories
    125g oven cooked: 165 calories

    For the record, I am steaming the chicken.

    So, I can weigh the chicken when its cooked. I just ate a 174g portion.

    Am I just to pro-rata the oven cooked calories:

    (165 / 125g) = 1.32 calories per gram cooked
    1.32 calories x 174g eaten = 230calories


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,735 ✭✭✭caviardreams


    newcar2016 wrote: »
    Trying to figure out my calories as best I can.

    On the chicken packet it says:

    100g Raw: 106 calories
    125g oven cooked: 165 calories

    For the record, I am steaming the chicken.

    So, I can weigh the chicken when its cooked. I just ate a 174g portion.

    Am I just to pro-rata the oven cooked calories:

    (165 / 125g) = 1.32 calories per gram cooked
    1.32 calories x 174g eaten = 230calories

    I always go by raw weight as you simply don't know how much water will be lost/gained etc. from cooking/preparation etc. It could vary significantly from the conditions it was tested/measured under. The numbers are just an estimate anyway really, but raw is more logical imo.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 96 ✭✭newcar2016


    I always go by raw weight as you simply don't know how much water will be lost/gained etc. from cooking/preparation etc. It could vary significantly from the conditions it was tested/measured under. The numbers are just an estimate anyway really, but raw is more logical imo.

    The packet states there is 350g chicken, I steamed it, and weighed it, and it weighed 387g.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,694 ✭✭✭✭Alf Veedersane


    newcar2016 wrote: »
    The packet states there is 350g chicken, I steamed it, and weighed it, and it weighed 387g.

    The extra weight is water.

    From the steam.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 96 ✭✭newcar2016


    I always go by raw weight as you simply don't know how much water will be lost/gained etc. from cooking/preparation etc. It could vary significantly from the conditions it was tested/measured under. The numbers are just an estimate anyway really, but raw is more logical imo.
    The extra weight is water.

    From the steam.

    Okay. So 387g steamed weight / 350g raw weight = 1.106 times the amount.

    I ate 175g but to work that back to raw weight I would divide by 1.106 so:

    175g steamed / 1.106 = 158g equivalent raw.

    106 calories per 100g raw * 1.58g equivalent raw = 168 calories.

    Which is alot less than my previous calculation:

    newcar2016 wrote: »
    Trying to figure out my calories as best I can.

    On the chicken packet it says:

    100g Raw: 106 calories
    125g oven cooked: 165 calories

    For the record, I am steaming the chicken.

    So, I can weigh the chicken when its cooked. I just ate a 174g portion.

    Am I just to pro-rata the oven cooked calories:

    (165 / 125g) = 1.32 calories per gram cooked
    1.32 calories x 174g eaten = 230calories


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,457 ✭✭✭livedadream


    newcar2016 wrote: »
    The packet states there is 350g chicken, I steamed it, and weighed it, and it weighed 387g.

    thats from water from when your steaming it...

    its why steamed chicken is fuffier and seems bulker


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,454 ✭✭✭mloc123


    newcar2016 wrote: »
    The packet states there is 350g chicken, I steamed it, and weighed it, and it weighed 387g.

    I have often bought packets of chicken and when the raw chicken is weighed out of the packet it was more than the stated number... the values are not exact.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,386 ✭✭✭✭rubadub


    mloc123 wrote: »
    I have often bought packets of chicken and when the raw chicken is weighed out of the packet it was more than the stated number... the values are not exact.

    yep, it can be WAY off, in tesco the chicken breast with bone in can be huge. I flick through the packs in case I spot any big ones.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 96 ✭✭newcar2016


    rubadub wrote: »
    yep, it can be WAY off, in tesco the chicken breast with bone in can be huge. I flick through the packs in case I spot any big ones.

    Will have to weigh it raw then from now onwards


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 39,900 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    The extra weight is water.

    From the steam.
    I'd be surprised if steaming it increased the weight, it might keep it the most moist but liquid still seeps from the chicken.

    Most likely the even figure of 350g is on all the packs and some are overfilled.
    newcar2016 wrote: »
    Okay. So 387g steamed weight / 350g raw weight = 1.106 times the amount.

    I ate 175g but to work that back to raw weight I would divide by 1.106 so:

    175g steamed / 1.106 = 158g equivalent raw.

    106 calories per 100g raw * 1.58g equivalent raw = 168 calories.

    Which is alot less than my previous calculation:

    Both your calculations are off tbh. You are using raw and oven baked calories, but weighed it when steamed.

    At 175g of cooked chicken was at least that raw I'd guess, maybe slightly more. So maybe 180-200 calories. No way to know the exact number, weighing raw would be more accurate in future.


Advertisement