raw vs. cooked - here we go again! Macro confusion

[gbrice75]

This concept is driving me CRAZY. I never would have guessed that the hardest part of my diet would be getting the numbers right.

When I started tracking all of my food, I was measuring all meats cooked. After researching and talking to people on this board, the general consensus was that meat should be measured raw. So if you have 4oz raw chicken breast which contains 24g protein and then cook it, it will yield about 3oz cooked chicken breast - still containing 24g protein. If that's the case, all is well and good. Here's my problem...

I use Perdue Fit and Easy Ground Chicken Breast for a lot of my meals. Perdue was kind enough to provide both raw and cooked nutritional info on the packaging. Nice of them right? NOT FOR ME!!!! Here's what they list for a single serving:

4oz raw - 24g protein. or 3oz cooked - 19g protein

How could that be? I know first hand from cooking it that 4oz raw yields about 3oz cooked - so shouldn't 3oz cooked and 4oz raw have the same nutritional makeup? If not, then based on Perdue's numbers 4oz cooked and 4oz raw will have about the same nutritional makeup - which if that's true, I can go back to measuring my meats cooked. Does 5g of protein get 'cooked out' of it?

So i've come full circle now, wondering if i've been undereating, overeating... just plain going crazy? I really need to get this right - my diet could be off by + or - hundreds of calories because of this confusion. Please help!

[killface]

Keep in mind that our metabolic rate and daily expenditure is usually no more than a rough estimate. That helped me get past this very same worry.

I try not to worry if I'm a couple of hundred calories off from a MBR that may, very well, be a couple hundred calories off from what it really is anyway. Especially when it comes to protein.

I simply adjust according to my results.

[RoadToRecovery]

This concept is driving me CRAZY. I never would have guessed that the hardest part of my diet would be getting the numbers right.

When I started tracking all of my food, I was measuring all meats cooked. After researching and talking to people on this board, the general consensus was that meat should be measured raw. So if you have 4oz raw chicken breast which contains 24g protein and then cook it, it will yield about 3oz cooked chicken breast - still containing 24g protein. If that's the case, all is well and good. Here's my problem...

I use Perdue Fit and Easy Ground Chicken Breast for a lot of my meals. Perdue was kind enough to provide both raw and cooked nutritional info on the packaging. Nice of them right? NOT FOR ME!!!! Here's what they list for a single serving:

4oz raw - 24g protein. or 3oz cooked - 19g protein

How could that be? I know first hand from cooking it that 4oz raw yields about 3oz cooked - so shouldn't 3oz cooked and 4oz raw have the same nutritional makeup? If not, then based on Perdue's numbers 4oz cooked and 4oz raw will have about the same nutritional makeup - which if that's true, I can go back to measuring my meats cooked. Does 5g of protein get 'cooked out' of it?

So i've come full circle now, wondering if i've been undereating, overeating... just plain going crazy? I really need to get this right - my diet could be off by + or - hundreds of calories because of this confusion. Please help!

Nutritiondata.com has cooked and raw values for everything.

Cooking food eliminates a good fraction of macro and micronutrients no matter what you are cooking. Between the juices running off of the meat, and the heat pretty much just burning the tissue - you lose your nutrients one way or another.

[gbrice75]

Thanks guys. i guess you're right - in the end, macros are off no matter how meticulous one is.

Road - I was using livestrong.com, but i'll check out nutritiondata.com.

I'm still bewildered over the Perdue thing though - 4oz raw and cooked contains the same nutritional value?