Why do hard boiled eggs have less calories than scrambled?

[gijoe985]

My friend just asked me this. He pointed out that on nutritiondata.com for 100g of hard boiled eggs it has less fat and carbs than 100g of scrambled, but this is also assuming that you are not adding oil or anything to the scrambled eggs, so why is this? Does cooking style change the structure?

[Insight]

bwuh?

has to be they're assuming that you add fat when you fry it or something.

i have no idea how frying could add carbs, or why boiling could take them away. i dunno though.

[StuckInFresno]

My friend just asked me this. He pointed out that on nutritiondata.com for 100g of hard boiled eggs it has less fat and carbs than 100g of scrambled, but this is also assuming that you are not adding oil or anything to the scrambled eggs, so why is this? Does cooking style change the structure?

Fat and CARBS??? Eggs are 95%+ fat and protein. How much of a difference is there according to your friend? I am pretty certain it's minute at best.

[shifter87]

This is actually true for a lot of different foods although very few actually say it. I bought turkey sausage for a nice protein and it says:

160 cal, 80 fat cal, 16 g protein for 1 link uncooked
140 cal, 70 fat cal, 15 g protein for 1 link cooked

Although it was different I wasn'ts complaining for losing the calories

[kanderson17]

the scrambled eggs is probably considering adding fat and milk

[getgot211]

This is actually true for a lot of different foods although very few actually say it. I bought turkey sausage for a nice protein and it says:

160 cal, 80 fat cal, 16 g protein for 1 link uncooked
140 cal, 70 fat cal, 15 g protein for 1 link cooked

Although it was different I wasn'ts complaining for losing the calories

uhhh, no. thats completely different.

[rocknout72]

the sausage is because of the fat that gets burned out of it when cooking I dont know about the eggs though

[BoMiX6]

Could it possibly have something to do with volume, i mean, an egg is an egg, but maybe the cooking process expands the quantity and in turn adds nutrients, I dunno.

[StuckInFresno]

Could it possibly have something to do with volume, i mean, an egg is an egg, but maybe the cooking process expands the quantity and in turn adds nutrients, I dunno.

I see where you're coming from, but cooking something does not add extra nutrients. Again, this is a very scientific type question and honestly I believe the difference cannot be that big. Have your friend (original poster's) double-check his info though.

[SwiftyX]

Is it possible that something on the interwebs is just inaccurate?

[rhizome]

My friend just asked me this. He pointed out that on nutritiondata.com for 100g of hard boiled eggs it has less fat and carbs than 100g of scrambled, but this is also assuming that you are not adding oil or anything to the scrambled eggs, so why is this? Does cooking style change the structure?

It's called moisture loss kids. Less water more egg.

[scump]

hard boiling takes longer? the longer you cook it the more nutrients you lose? maybe they assume you have your scrambled eggs runny?

[sunngodd]

Could it possibly have something to do with volume, i mean, an egg is an egg, but maybe the cooking process expands the quantity and in turn adds nutrients, I dunno.

It's called moisture loss kids. Less water more egg.

hard boiling takes longer? the longer you cook it the more nutrients you lose? maybe they assume you have your scrambled eggs runny?

this thread is full of teh win

[TommySK]

An egg is an egg and no matter how you prepare it it will still have the same amount of calories in it.

[BigSnacks]

Density would be my guess. Take the old riddle: What weighs more, a ton of bricks or a ton of feathers?

What weighs more, 100g of scrambled egg or 100g of boiled egg? Neither, they weigh the same. But are they of the same density?

Take 1 egg and scramble it with no additives then weight it. Does it weigh the same as 1 boiled and peeled egg? It could take, say, 1.3 eggs scrambled to weigh the same as 1 egg boiled, thus the fat content of scrambled eggs would be higher because there was actually more egg.

But then the OP only pointed out the difference in fat and (carbs?), and made no mention of a difference in calories, so maybe it's just bad information.

[IEatPowerRacks]

It's called moisture loss kids. Less water more egg.

This... I'm surprised how little common sense you guys have.

[Opies]

why don't you just use the raw egg info? If scrambled has more carbs, then maybe they assume you add milk like a lot of people do for fluffy scrambled eggs. A bit of cooking oil too... etc...

Just use the raw value and add in whatever you use to cook it or top it with. it's not hard

[Sephra]

maybe it has to do with the bonds between the molecules/atoms? We dabbled in a bit of organic-chem once, however it was just that bonds do change differently depending on the way you cook a certain thing.

[Southurn]

Already been said

Originally Posted by rhizome
It's called moisture loss kids. Less water more egg.

100g of boiled egg keeps a good deal of it's moisture.

scrambled eggs loses alot of it's moisture and takes more eggs to be 100g

[borlef]

Already been said




100g of boiled egg keeps a good deal of it's moisture.

scrambled eggs loses alot of it's moisture and takes more eggs to be 100g

That was pretty amazing how long it took to get that answer.

[BloodRaged]

Maybe the data they imported were from different egg sources and chickens raised/fed different.

A horse is a horse of course of course...

[gijoe985]

Already been said




100g of boiled egg keeps a good deal of it's moisture.

scrambled eggs loses alot of it's moisture and takes more eggs to be 100g

This is what I was originally assuming. Though it still does not fully explain why the ratio of carbs to fat to protein is different.

Water loss would explain a change in totals, but not the ratio.

Scrambled
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/d...products/120/2

Hard Boiled
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/d...products/117/2


Another hypothesis
By cooking egg you are affecting the bioavailable protein. Correct? I.e. you digest a different amount of protein. Maybe by hard boiling, vs scrambling, it makes a different amount of protein available for digestion. That would change the ratio.

Lastly, my friend came to me with this question honestly. And I told him I'd give him an honest scientific answer. Though I did advise him that an egg is an egg and that I would not stress the few grams difference. So, water loss/retention explains part of the answer, but not why the ratio changes.

Thanks to everyone for the sincere help.

[tp90]

This... I'm surprised how little common sense you guys have.

bump

[djkernen]

You people are all missing something. I don't know what, but I know it's not about moisture and an egg is not an egg.

Consider that a raw large egg is about 78 calories but when that same egg is soft boiled it is 79-80 and when hard boiled it's 80-81. Ok the difference is small but it is noted at every website I have checked. Also, this is a per egg measure not a per 100 g, so the moisture content argument doesn't hold water ha ha.

That same egg when scrambled is a whopping 100 g, even though a properly scrambled egg is just egg and water, no added fat, no added milk, no added nothing but water which calories wise is nothing. So why is x+0>x huh?

I stumbled across this forum because I had the same question, why do cooked eggs have MORE calories than raw? I understand that cooked sausage loses matter in the cooking process so the cooked calorie count goes down, and I understand that when you fry anything in fat you are going to have more calories because you are adding fat, but why are you adding calories just by cooking the egg? Does the energy used to cook the egg get partially stored somehow in the end product? This is crazy and I am totally wigging out over here so help!!!

[PR1MO]

Scrambled eggs are made with milk/cream/butter. Don't know why the discussion went any further than that.

[belairdfence99]

uhhhhhh for all intents and purposes, 1 egg is 1 egg, no matter how you cut it.

[michaeljthacker]

You people are all missing something. I don't know what, but I know it's not about moisture and an egg is not an egg.

Consider that a raw large egg is about 78 calories but when that same egg is soft boiled it is 79-80 and when hard boiled it's 80-81. Ok the difference is small but it is noted at every website I have checked. Also, this is a per egg measure not a per 100 g, so the moisture content argument doesn't hold water ha ha.

That same egg when scrambled is a whopping 100 g, even though a properly scrambled egg is just egg and water, no added fat, no added milk, no added nothing but water which calories wise is nothing. So why is x+0>x huh?

I stumbled across this forum because I had the same question, why do cooked eggs have MORE calories than raw? I understand that cooked sausage loses matter in the cooking process so the cooked calorie count goes down, and I understand that when you fry anything in fat you are going to have more calories because you are adding fat, but why are you adding calories just by cooking the egg? Does the energy used to cook the egg get partially stored somehow in the end product? This is crazy and I am totally wigging out over here so help!!!

I agree. We are all missing something. I believe that something is chemisty a food scientist might be able to explain. Crack a raw egg and you will find a liquid. Crack a hard-boiled egg and you will find a solid. I haven't had any chemistry in a while, but I'm pretty sure a solid forming (unless liquid evaporates and exits through the shell) is a sign of chemical reaction.

Anything to do with chemical reaction is beyond a straightforward argument of "an egg is an egg", or "water evaporates" or otherwise. Any chemists out there?

[Domicron]

dude this is a 6 year old thread full of stupid people: why would you bump it?

[mike33511]

I agree. We are all missing something. I believe that something is chemisty a food scientist might be able to explain. Crack a raw egg and you will find a liquid. Crack a hard-boiled egg and you will find a solid. I haven't had any chemistry in a while, but I'm pretty sure a solid forming (unless liquid evaporates and exits through the shell) is a sign of chemical reaction.

Anything to do with chemical reaction is beyond a straightforward argument of "an egg is an egg", or "water evaporates" or otherwise. Any chemists out there?

A phase change does not mean a chemical reaction has taken place. A phase change is a physical change and a chemical reaction requires a chemical change. Try again.

[Mrpb]

I'd say it's because moisture gets lost when you cook them scrambled. This doesn't happen when cooked.