The Problem with Nutrition Labels and Macros

Probably once a week I see a post from somebody that’s a rookie to counting calories asking how the calories on the label don’t add up. Well, there are two very simple answers if you are in the US: the product is mislabeled (intentionally or not) or they are following the FDA labeling standards and regulations and making the product more desirable to nutrition conscious people.

Addressing the first scenario, it isn’t a unique or unusual problem to have a product “mislabeled.” As other posts have explained far better than I can, the concept of a calorie is flawed. You can read about it here in Scientific American. The tl;dr version of why a calorie isn’t just a calorie can be summed up to just a few parts:

• Calories are measured in isolation, meaning with just that food. This does not account for what we have eaten previously or at the same time as our meal. By combining foods, like most people do, we change the time needed for digestion and how hard our body works to perform digestion. This changes the Thermic Effect of Food.
• Different people react to different foods differently and take different amounts of calories from them based on their unique body chemistry and gut bacteria. This blog post explains further based on a study done with mice.
• Calorie labels on prepackaged food are “averages” and may be higher or lower than your actual meal. Since many prepackaged foods are mixes of several different foods, the exact amount of each ingredient is rarely precise. When the amount of each food isn't precise combined with an inexact range of calories, chances are, you aren't getting what the label says. 

With the second issue, it’s a matter of the FDA giving more than a loophole, but leaving a canyon of ways to trick the consumer. Here are just a few of the ways labels can be manipulated to read as lower or more desirable.

• According to the FDA, if there are less than 5 calories per serving, the total calories can be declared as 0. That means if I create something like coffee creamer and claim a small serving size, like a tsp. and it has 4 calories, I can promote it as a 0 calorie product.
• If the product has 50 calories or less--Round to nearest 5-calorie increment: Example: Round 47 calories to “45 calories”
• If the product has above 50 calories--Round to nearest 10-calorie increment: Example: Round 94 calories to “90 calories”
• Alcohol brings up another anomaly to the calorie counter.  Carbs are 4 calories per gram, fat is 9, but alcohol falls in the middle at 7 calories per gram.
• Lastly, fat can be labeled as 0 fat when there is less than .5 g per serving. So a product with .4 g of fat per serving is fat free.

As you can see, there are a few ways a manufacturer can make a pre-packaged food into something it really isn’t and throw off your most dedicated efforts to eat on plan.

Let’s take a look at something many people use every day, coffee creamer. If we’re trying to be a macro-magician, we might be super concerned with the exact measures so we pick a “Fat Free International Delights”. On the left side, the Canadian label; on the right, the US label.


Same product, same calories listed… one label tells you their best average per serving and the other hides some information because the FDA allows it through rounding.

Let’s take this further. Since there are no restrictions on what is considered a serving size, one product can list a different serving size to make it seem more appealing. Doesn’t seem like a big deal, but it can add up over all your different meals throughout the week, especially if you don't check the serving sizes.

Italian Dressing	1 tbsp	2 tbsp
Calories	50	80
Fat	6g	7g
Carbs	1g	4g
Protein	0g	0g

If you’re grabbing one of these dressings off the shelf and you’re just looking quickly at the label for the one that reads the “healthiest”, you might overlook the serving size and go right to the nutrition counts. Take into account that very few of us ever use just 1 or 2 tablespoons and the 30 extra calories for 2 tbsp starts to add up. Yes, this is a small example, but it happens on a larger scale, too. Just imagine this with Peanut Butter or some other "treat" that you enjoy.

Moving on.

The calorie counting problem is a complex one complicated by a lack of precise labeling regulations in the US and the rounding of both macros and total calories. Further, the ability to manipulate serving sizes allows manufacturers create certain labels and make a less healthy product more appealing. If you really are going to be precise (which I don’t recommend unless you want to drive yourself crazy or are a top level competitor) you need to really read carefully and do the math instead of just trusting the companies that play within the rules to look better.

And if you want a better solution, give yourself a margin of error, say 4% of your total calories. On a 2,000 calorie diet, that’s 80 calories. At the end of the day, you might slow down your progress just a little bit, but you won’t drive yourself insane along the way.

Lastly, if you’re brand spanking new to healthy eating, take baby steps; start with just making some better food choices and just writing down what you eat. There will be a time to make things more detailed, but in the beginning, just get started!

Weight Loss - The Internet is Filled with Stupid Ideas

As most of you know, I spend a lot of hours reading articles and blogs posted by other fitness minded individuals looking for “new” information or research, something I can use to improve my skills and understanding. Most of my time is spent on the weekends going through blog after blog and article after article looking for something unique. Instead of finding unique articles, I have been finding unique viewpoints on old material. There is value in having a disagreeing viewpoint when it comes to creating traffic, but sometimes, the foundation of disagreement is so stupid it can’t be ignored. Two posts I have seen lately are how a lady “stopped exercising and lost weight” and how “simply cutting carbs results in fat loss”. Total click-bait, but I fell for it and got sucked into the posts and scared for the thousands of people that would read and believe these posts.

Between the magic bullet articles that promote eliminating entire food groups, “detoxing” with lemon vinegar tea coffee bean extract, or “15 fast fat burning foods”, common sense about sustainable weight loss takes the backseat because it isn’t what people want to hear. People don’t want to hear that it isn’t quick or easy. They don’t want to hear that it takes time, effort, and a little bit of common sense. They don’t want to hear that sometimes you can do everything the way your favorite fitness icon does it and fail. Sometimes their lives are so hectic they just need the Disney ending to their struggle with eating, body-image, and fitness. Sadly, Walt didn’t figure out how to make fairy-tale magic happen for us.

This would have been a short post had it not been for the number of posts and messages we receive from similar cases. The lady that stopped exercising and lost weight was like so many people first starting out. She was doing everything right, or so she thought; five hour-long sessions per week, tracking her calories in, and tracking her calories out. Where she went wrong was instead of having weight training and cardio, she was only doing cardio like rowing, walking, etc. She also made the huge mistake of estimating her caloric burn and then eating back those calories. After some time of trying to lose weight this way, she was injured by her dog and unable to be active. Because there was no exercise, there were no calories to eat back and amazingly, she lost weight! This led her to the conclusion that not exercising and eating normally is the way to go instead of performing exercise, building muscle, and still eating in a deficit by not eating back your calories.

Many people forget that building muscle is healthy for our metabolism and believe that a low scale weight is all they need. When we move from active to couch potato, our body will waste muscle, especially when faced with a caloric deficit. Remember, a pound of muscle takes up less space in the body than a pound of fat, so while the scale drops, the tape measure may increase as the body loses muscle but builds up fat. In the evil scenario, we lose precious muscle and reduce our intake, slowing our metabolism. Similar to the “The Biggest Loser Scenario” where contestants lose weight only to regain it years later, losing weight only through reduced intake is likely to result in the regain of fat. When discussing TBL and the downfalls, I’ve had more than a few people misinterpret my objection to mean not eating at a deficit. That is not what I am suggesting at all. I am suggesting having a set number of calories regardless of whether you train or not. I am suggesting a small to moderate deficit caused primarily by activities, specifically resistance exercise. No matter how you cut it, weight loss requires some form of deficit.

Another factor the post brought to light is the concept of “eating back” exercise calories. One popular food / activity tracker in particular encourages you to eat back your exercise calories by giving you a low target and increasing your target intake as you exercise. I find this to be a poorly thought out recommendation for several reasons. Calorie labels / trackers rely on averages. As PN points out in “The Surprising Problem with Calorie Counting - Calories In” it is very hard to reliably say how many calories we are actually consuming. Further, calorie expenditure, even when monitored with a good heart rate monitor has a minimum 10% error. The second part of “The Surprising Problem with Calorie Counting - Calories Out” breaks down just how bad estimates are for predicting how many calories we burn through exercise. Combine the inaccuracy of calories listed on a label with the variance of calories burned and you have the beginning of a recipe for disaster when you attempt to eat back your calories.

Some believe that adjusted macros will create fat loss. Simply adjusting macro intake won’t translate to fat loss or weight loss with few exceptions. Yes, I acknowledge the concept of a recomposition, which is the process of building muscle and losing fat at the same time. No, your body doesn’t turn fat into muscle and no, it isn’t easy. The post proclaiming all that is needed to lose fat is reducing carbohydrate intake is a sad oversimplification. Regardless of how low you get your carbohydrate intake there are other factors:

Total caloric intake and deficit - if there’s no deficit, the body has no need to burn fat stores.

Stress - causes Cortisol release. Cortisol is a factor in the accumulation of visceral fat and sugar cravings.

Sleep - it’s our body’s chance to repair and recover. If you’re not getting enough sleep, you don’t recover, have a tendency to eat more, have impaired glucose control, and are likely to have higher Cortisol levels.

The solution:

Avoid the scale -

Like many others, I recommend limited use of the scale only to track patterns in weight gain or loss. Scales can be highly inaccurate measures and vary up to 10 lbs per day depending on our size. Unless you are severely overweight, there are better measures. If we only watch the scale, we risk losing the right kind of weight for the wrong kind.

Body Composition -

We know it’s possible to be at a “healthy weight” and have a high bodyfat percentage and that it’s possible to be “overweight” and have a low bodyfat percentage. There are hundreds of pictures of people that have gained weight yet become slimmer by building muscle. Even if the goal is to lower your weight, there needs to be a focus on building and maintaining muscle to keep burning calories. The result of losing muscle is a soft physique with less than ideal metabolism.

Hip & Waist Measures -

While body composition is one of the best, tracking changes in hip and waist circumference (two places we all tend to store fat) is a good indicator of our training and diet progress. There is also a high correlation of disease associated with people that have a high waist to hip ratio.

Tracking -

Track what you are eating, not necessarily taking calorie count as being exact, but understanding it is a range. When you find how much you can eat and maintain your weight for a week, decrease your calories by a minimal amount, say 10%. If you aren’t active, add some activity. No fancy gym necessary, but some basic bodyweight work to start.

Use the scale to track for weight changes, knowing that your weight can fluctuate +/- 10 pounds every day depending on your size. I like to keep a running five-day average, which will allow for those daily fluctuations.

Track progress using a variety of tools:  clothing fit, tape measure, progress photos, general feelings throughout the day. If two or more measures are moving in the right direction, you’re making progress, even if the scale isn’t moving.

Patience -

Be patient. Understand that most changes takes several weeks to show up and that good, lasting progress will take time, so if your goal is to be “bikini body” ready in 6 weeks, it may be time to re-think and re-plan.

Be patient through the failures, the slip-ups, and the lack of progress. Each time we don’t move forward is an opportunity to learn and make progress. Each opportunity allows us the chance to figure out to do it better and how to forgive ourselves when we make mistakes.