My dietary plan doesn't include pasta - not the wheat variety, at least. A company called "Cappello's" makes an almond pasta which is good. Still carbs in there, but not so much as typical pastas. I buy mine online from the manufacturer. We like it.
Fitness Minutes: (67,953)
2,770 7/21/13 5:14 P
Online Now • ))
Pasta is horribly high in carbs and calories. You shouldn't ever be eating more than 2oz. dry weight of any pasta. Wet/cooked measurement of pasta is not accurate as size, shape and cooking time/method change the volume so much.
I can't stand whole wheat pasta (grew up with the fresh semolina stuff and good grade Italian dry pasta) but Barilla Plus is pretty tasty and actually has *some* redeeming nutritional value. 2 oz. has 210 calories, 38g carbs, 4g fiber, 10g protein and 2g fat.
I eat it, just not very often. You can't get enough for it to be really filling without spending a lot of your nutrition budget for the day. I like to mix that tiny amount of pasta with lots of fresh tomatoes, homemade pesto, cooked chicken and a handful of spinach to increase the volume of the meal.
Fitness Minutes: (3,354)
33 7/21/13 4:58 P
RUSSELL, that actually makes sense.. I never thought much of it before because I always used the package nutrition label on my wholewheat pasta, which is counted for dry. This time I had to use some generic spiral white pasta that didn't have a label and measured it after cooking (not sure how much in cups, I mostly weigh my stuff and my serving was 100 grams.) I'm allowed up to 45 g of carbs per meal, so even in the scenario you mentioned I think I haven't gone over my limit. Thank you! Now if I ever run out of my usual brand I will know better and measure it before cooking.
The pasta my brother has is not whole wheat, and is 41 grams of carbohydrates per 1/2 cup. dry. When I look up macaroni noodles, I get the same totals from SP.Some pasta is 3/4 cup per serving based on how loosely packed it can be put into a cup, but it seems to be 41 g per serving. You should probably look at the box this pasta came from. It will say dry, or cooked, and how much per serving. Use that information.
One thing to consider is that the amount of your pasta cooked will depend on how fully cooked it is. It absorbs water which has 0 calories, but the I can cook two identical dry servings of pasta, and come up with a different result in terms of volume of the cooked pasta. The longer you cook it, the more it will expand, as it gets softer, and absorbs more water. So it would be almost impossible to count it after cooking, because it would depend on the person cooking it. Al dente pasta might be a smaller volume, even though it is the same initial amount dry. So despite the differing volumes, there would still be the exact same amount of calories in two identical amounts dry. If you liked your pasta cooked more, then you would be counting the same amount of pasta at a much higher calorie level. Lesser cooked pasta would fit more calories into the same volume. So two people could eat the same exact serving, and depending on how it was cooked, they could eat 1/2 a cup each, and one may be eating 60 extra calories, if they base it on volume after cooking. Dry past has no variable. It is solid, and can be accurately measured, and quantified. It is more accurate measuring it this way.
Edited by: RUSSELL_40 at: 7/21/2013 (14:27)
Fitness Minutes: (67,997)
9,189 7/21/13 12:54 P
I like to go by cooked measurements, like 1/2 cup, which is one serving of ANY pasta.
Sometimes, when things don't seem right in the database, I'll add other similar things, or 2-3 different entries for something close, just to see if it seems "off." Happens sometimes.
Fitness Minutes: (3,354)
33 7/21/13 10:45 A
I used a generic pasta that does not list nutrition info, only ingredients. The term I searched for on the tracker was pasta, cooked and that's what I got. The listing is called pasta, cooked but looks like a bad entry for the title. It should have been called "pasta, dry" or something. Well I'm glad you've confirmed it because my daily allowance is 100-150 g of carbs and that number would have shaved off half of my stash and sent my blood sugar through the roof! (I'm pre-diabetic)
you have to look at the box you were using. how much pasta did you start with? because the 3.5oz looks to be dry info, at least for the pastas i buy [around 200 cals for 2oz/56g and around 40 carbs for that serving]. and if you did start with 3.5oz dry, that's should yield almost four servings of cooked pasta. so yeah, it would have a lot of carbs, it's 2/3 the minimum grain servings you need for the day. if your 3.5 oz/100 grams of pasta was cooked pasta, say around half a cup, i would say it's more likely you had about an ounce of dry pasta and your numbers are closer to 1/4 of what you have listed. again, that's without seeing whatever info is on the box that you buy and going by what i buy on average.
Fitness Minutes: (3,354)
33 7/21/13 10:04 A
I felt like having some pasta today, and I didn't have wholewheat so I just cooked some regular pasta. When I added it to my tracker, to my horror a 100 gram serving (3.5 oz) clocked a horrifying 73.7 g of carbs when wholewheat only has 26.5 g for the same amount!! Is it even possible? How accurate are the foods listed on spark nutrition tracker? This wasn't added by a member (didn't have a member name next to it) and what confirms it is that it had more than one choice of measuring units. I'm pretty confused right now...
SparkPeople, SparkCoach, SparkPages, SparkPoints, SparkDiet, SparkAmerica, SparkRecipes, DailySpark, and other marks are trademarks of SparkPeople, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
SPARKPEOPLE is a registered trademark of SparkPeople, Inc. in the United States, European Union, Canada, and Australia. All rights reserved.