Weighing out your food?

[Deal Me In]

Always after.

[tarmyg]

Always after.

huh?

Before obviously. Food is ALWAYS ​measured in it's raw state.

[Deal Me In]

huh?

Before obviously. Food is ALWAYS ​measured in it's raw state.

He asked specifically about chicken. You weigh chicken, or any meat, after you cook it. You don't eat it raw so why would you measure it that way?

[GirlyGymRat]

He asked specifically about chicken. You weigh chicken, or any meat, after you cook it. You don't eat it raw so why would you measure it that way?

Weigh before cook. It doesn't seen right but it is.

[Back In Black]

He asked specifically about chicken. You weigh chicken, or any meat, after you cook it. You don't eat it raw so why would you measure it that way?

Because then you know exactly how much you are getting. 8oz chicken raw has the same amount of cals and macro's after it is cooked. If you cook it for 20 mins it weighs more than it does than if you cook it it for 40 minutes but still has the same cals and macro's. That's why.

[Deal Me In]

Because then you know exactly how much you are getting. 8oz chicken raw has the same amount of cals and macro's after it is cooked. If you cook it for 20 mins it weighs more than it does than if you cook it it for 40 minutes but still has the same cals and macro's. That's why.

BIB, I'm sure you know more about this than I do but this seems really strange. Raw chicken in moist. I always assumed the difference in weight pre and post cooked was the loss of water which would be negligible for macros. If the chicken isn't getting lighter because of a reduction in liquid, what accounts for the reduction in weight?

Just trying to understand.

[Back In Black]

BIB, I'm sure you know more about this than I do but this seems really strange. Raw chicken in moist. I always assumed the difference in weight pre and post cooked was the loss of water which would be negligible for macros. If the chicken isn't getting lighter because of a reduction in liquid, what accounts for the reduction in weight?

Just trying to understand.

You are correct, it is water that is lost. Let's put it this way you have 2 pieces of cooked chicken one weighs 4oz and one weighs 3oz. The 3oz one has been cooked 10 minutes longer than the 4oz one but both were exactly the same weight before they were cooked. So which one of the 2 cooked pieces of chicken has the most protein?

[Docd187123]

You are correct, it is water that is lost. Let's put it this way you have 2 pieces of cooked chicken one weighs 4oz and one weighs 3oz. The 3oz one has been cooked 10 minutes longer than the 4oz one but both were exactly the same weight before they were cooked. So which one of the 2 cooked pieces of chicken has the most protein?

Pick me BIB, pick me!!!!!

[Deal Me In]

You are correct, it is water that is lost. Let's put it this way you have 2 pieces of cooked chicken one weighs 4oz and one weighs 3oz. The 3oz one has been cooked 10 minutes longer than the 4oz one but both were exactly the same weight before they were cooked. So which one of the 2 cooked pieces of chicken has the most protein?

Well, I don't want to assume because that's what got my foot stuck in my mouth at the beginning of this thread. I'm going to say they both have the same amount of protein.

So, just so we can take this through to it's conclusion. Lets say I have a raw chicken breast that weighs 8oz. If we assume 7g of protein per oz then it's 56 grams. The fact that it cooks down to say 5.5oz is not relevant. It still has 56 grams of protein. No nutrients are lost in the cooking process? Right?

So I've based my diet on eating 6 oz of cooked chicken. Which was probably 8oz raw. So I need to redo my protein macros for the day.