100 grams versus 200 calories
Q. When I use the Nutrient Search Tool, I have to choose between 100 gram servings and 200 calorie servings. I'm never sure which to pick.
A. For those who might be unfamiliar with the Nutrient Search Tool on Nutrition Data, it ranks foods according nutrients that you select. For example, you might want to find foods that are highest in calcium or lowest in iron (or both).
Which serving size you select depends on what type of foods you are looking for.
Say you're looking for oils that are low in omega-6 fats. Because oils are very calorie-dense, you're probably better off using a 200-calorie serving, because this is closer to the serving size that you are likely to choose. (A 200-calorie serving of oil is approximately 2 tablespoons.) A 100-gram serving, on the other hand, is closer to a half cup.
But perhaps you're looking for vegetables that are high in vitamin K. In this case, you're probably better off with a 100-gram serving, because vegetables are NOT calorie-dense. A 100-gram is much more likely to be a reasonable serving size. A 100-gram serving of kale is about a cup and a half. A 200-hundred calorie serving, on the other hand, is about ten cups!
If you're still not sure which will yield the most useful results, try the search both ways!
Another tip: Dehydrated foods such as dried herbs tend to turn up at the top of both types of searches because either serving size (100-grams or 200 calories) is going to represent a gigantic amount of the herb. Use the links at the top of the search results to narrow your results to the categories you're most interested in. Or, control which categories display in your searches using our Preference Settings.
 older posts |
home | newer posts  |
| Non-fish sources of omega-3 fats | | Nutrition Data Blog | | Is there any nutrition in strawberry tops? |
Posted by: Kristin | Jun 10, 2008 10:52:09 PM
Monica,
Being able to select multiple categories using the control key would be great! (in fact, I had already tried that, thinking it would be)
Posted by: Kristin | Jun 10, 2008 10:51:00 PM
Monica,
Being able to select multiple categories using the control key would be great! (in fact, I had already tried that, thinking it would be)
Posted by: www.thrive9to5.com | Jun 10, 2008 8:26:44 PM
This is a great tool and great site! Thank you for keeping us informed about the foods we consume!
-KD
Posted by: Monica Reinagel | Jun 10, 2008 4:16:25 PM
Kristin,
keep in mind that you can narrow your search to a certain category right up front. But sometimes it's helpful to see how the search results distribute across the various categories. Look for the number in parentheses next to each category and that tells you how many of the top 999 are found in that category.
Or, here's a suggestion that I could make to our tech team: How would it be if you could select multiple categories for a search by holding down the control key or something? That might be helpful instead of having to search categories one at a time. What do you think?
Posted by: Kristin | Jun 10, 2008 4:14:13 PM
The other thing I noticed is that if I start my search by clicking on a nutrient or "See foods highest/lowest in..." on my analysis page, I only get results based on the 200 cal serving (I don't seem to have the 100 gm choice).
Posted by: Kristin Dzugan | Jun 10, 2008 3:52:14 PM
I like the suggestion to omit spices & herbs from this type of search, but if I reset my preferences, then I can't look up a new spice without resetting. It would be nice if I could override my preference list in such a case by simply selecting the category when I need it.
