Nutrition Label annoying/confusing me

[madindehead]

I realise I'm probably being very thick with this, but a nutrition label has been annoying/confusing me today.

I'm trying to work out the macros I'll get in my pasta at lunch, and I'm looking at the label here. It says the nutrition is for cooked pasta.

100g cooked has 145 calories which makes sense. But then 1 serving (around 90g, as the 1kg packet has 11 servings) is 290 calories.

This makes me think that the serving size is a dry weight. Am I being thick, or is the label confusing?

 

[PhillyDee]

Only by not telling what a serving is in dry weight. If they are saying 11 servings is in 1Kg, then around 90g cooks to the 200g cooked that they are telling you. But the cooked weight would depend on how much liquid the pasta has absorbed really. You can't pin down a serving on the wet weight as it will vary by liquid content.

 

[Somnambulist]

I agree those labels are annoying - I always want the dry weight. As above, use the servings guide, multiply to get the total weight then divide to get 100g and just go with that.

GENERALLY, uncooked white pasta, rice, cous cous and that sort of thing is going to be something like 10-15g protein, 65-75g carbs and 1-2g fat per 100g raw weight. Wholewheat will probably be slightly different - all I'd do is just find 100g dry weight macros online somewhere and use them.

Numbers for any one food will never be 100% accurate anyway - even if whatever figure you use is slightly wrong if you consistently use it, that is the important thing. Ultimately unless you're eating massive amounts of pasta being out by a few grams here on there won't make any difference.