You can use a raw weight entry if you like, just make sure it's a raw weight entry that you're logging it as, not a sparkpeople database meat entry. Yes, it makes a difference.
What do you mean "nothing is really cooking anyway"? As you point out, a steak can weigh a significantly different amount when cooked so while you're not cooking off calories, if you record a raw 100g steak as 100g of cooked meat you'll be over-recording it. It takes more than 100g raw meat to make 100g cooked meat.
Fitness Minutes: (2,138)
3,121 4/5/13 10:43 P
@ThirteenSteps: I tend to disagree. I also weigh cooked meats before logging the nutritional values on SparkPeople. Cooked meats DO contain less fats and such (in liquid form). I simply cook the meat first, drain off the excess liquids (you can see the fat floating in the liquid), then weigh it. Less fat, less calories. That 6-oz 93/7 burger patty (at 170 calories per 4-oz) becomes around 4.6-oz cooked, thereby meaning fewer calories and fat.
Thank you. I usually use the "cooked weight" but, was curious for meats I was cooking IN something else. I guess it's best to use the "raw" weight because nothing is really cooking away.
Fitness Minutes: (33,526)
22,037 4/5/13 10:12 P
I contacted our Meat Board and got them to send me the Nutritional Breakdown of ALL cuts of meat - in the raw state, and some in the cooked state. I also use the NZ Meat Board figures because different countries seem to prefer varying fat content, and I don't want to record for a higher one when I eat lower.
I mostly use the raw state and weigh it, because often the cooked state doesn't say if it is cooked with other things or what the liquid is and that can alter the nutritional numbers.
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.