# Thread: Trying to count calories in a can of tuna

1. ## Trying to count calories in a can of tuna

Hi everyone! The question might seem like a noobie one but I was unable to figure this out myself. So...

I have a can of tuna (See the pic below. It's in Russian but you'll get it)

1) First off, 23 grams of protein multiplied by 4 gives us 92 kcal, 1 g. of fat gives us 9 kcal, sum it up and we have 101 kcal in total,
but the nutrition facts say it's 90 kcal. So what's the truth?
2) It's not said whether the nutrition facts are for drained tuna or not. The weight of the fish is only 130 grams. What number should I use as a multiplier here to figure out nutrition facts? 185g or 130g? How much protein does the can contain? 1.3*23=29.9 or 1.85*23=42.55?

2. Yes I can see why this bothers you. If it is in fact 101 calories and not 90 then you are on the road to obesity by consuming those 11 extra calories

3. Originally Posted by safcpaul
Yes I can see why this bothers you. If it is in fact 101 calories and not 90 then you are on the road to obesity by consuming those 11 extra calories
lol

4. Is it in water or oil?

5. Originally Posted by desslok
Is it in water or oil?

It clearly says 20938r72197fh4 7923h 87h2387h8~!

6. Originally Posted by safcpaul
Yes I can see why this bothers you. If it is in fact 101 calories and not 90 then you are on the road to obesity by consuming those 11 extra calories
I'm just trying to figure the right way of counting out. Also, protein intake varies quite a lot depending on whether the nutrition value is for drained tuna (130g) or not. If you count your macros, it messes everything up and all you have at the end of some month is one big mess.
Originally Posted by desslok
Is it in water or oil?
It's in water

7. Originally Posted by TheShredded
I'm just trying to figure the right way of counting out. Also, protein intake varies quite a lot depending on whether the nutrition value is for drained tuna (130g) or not. If you count your macros, it messes everything up and all you have at the end of some month is one big mess.

It's in water
if you drain it and it's 130 grams, you won't lose any protein since you're literally draining water. drained or not, it has the same amount of calories and should be counted using the tuna amount (130 grams)

tuna in oil however, you kind of have to estimate the calories if you drain some of the oil

It clearly says 20938r72197fh4 7923h 87h2387h8~!
I'm from Russia so the label might be confusing. According to it, 100g contains 23g of protein, 1g of fat and 90 kcal.

9. Originally Posted by faithbrah
if you drain it and it's 130 grams, you won't lose any protein since you're literally draining water. drained or not, it has the same amount of calories and should be counted using the tuna amount (130 grams)

tuna in oil however, you kind of have to estimate the calories if you drain some of the oil
Thank you, I got this. But what's the answer to my first question? We all know 1 gram of protein has 4 kcal and 1 gram of fat has 9 kcal. And this is not in alignment with the label in any way.

10. Originally Posted by TheShredded
I'm from Russia so the label might be confusing. According to it, 100g contains 23g of protein, 1g of fat and 90 kcal.
First, most likely is rounding errors. They aren’t going to put 22.6 g of protein and .6 gm fat, they round up to the whole number.

Second, the 1gm of protein=4 calories and 1 gm pf fat isnt really true. That is also rounded off already.

So you add double rounding off and things can get wonky. Thats why its funny when people try to be so anal with calorie counting.

Also, in soviet russia, tuna counts YOU!

11. Originally Posted by desslok
First, most likely is rounding errors. They aren’t going to put 22.6 g of protein and .6 gm fat, they round up to the whole number.

Second, the 1gm of protein=4 calories and 1 gm pf fat isnt really true. That is also rounded off already.

So you add double rounding off and things can get wonky. Thats why its funny when people try to be so anal with calorie counting.

Also, in soviet russia, tuna counts YOU!
So there's no way to figure out the real numbers? I've found this pic and think that's what my nutrition facts should look like instead. Somewhere between 90 and 101 kcal

And that last joke...I didn't get it at all)

12. Write a letter to the company asking for clarification. You’ll feel better and at the same time you’ll burn off those extra 10 calories. Win-win!

13. Originally Posted by TheShredded
So there's no way to figure out the real numbers?
Yes. Test every can you buy at a food lab because each of them will be different.

14. Originally Posted by TheShredded
So there's no way to figure out the real numbers? I've found this pic and think that's what my nutrition facts should look like instead. Somewhere between 90 and 101 kcal

And that last joke...I didn't get it at all)

15. It’s a f*cking can of tuna- just eat it.

16. In Soviet Russia, tuna measures you.

17. Just go by what's on the label. You'll go crazy if you start double-checking calorie info on every packaged/canned food item you buy.

Besides, if you don't trust the calories listed on the label, why would you trust the protein, fat and weight amounts listed that you're using as the basis of your own calculations?

18. The 4/4/9 numbers are approximations. Read here if curious (or google "atwater factors" if you want to find a shorter summary): http://www.fao.org/3/Y5022E/y5022e04.htm

in the US the total calories on the package accounts for this so the total calories is what people should go by. I have no idea what is done in Russia.

In general the best way to do this if you want to track is use the total calories for your calorie count and the specified grams of protein/carbs/fats for your macro counts. As long as you don't eat too much of foods that are significantly different with their Atwater factors (ie, cocoa) this should be fine and require minimal effort/thought.

19. Originally Posted by TheShredded
So there's no way to figure out the real numbers? I've found this pic and think that's what my nutrition facts should look like instead. Somewhere between 90 and 101 kcal

And that last joke...I didn't get it at all)
Ah

So your nutrition label is for 100 grams, not for the whole amount of tuna

Maybe that company just expects you to do the math?

Idk if it’s like Thailand and other countries which are not like auzzieland, Western Europe, Canada, USA where nutrition labels are heavily regulated. I guess weigh it and just google it and not sweat if it’s off a little. Many labels in Thailand when I was living there also only gave the nutritional value per 100 grams even if the package was less or more than that.

Anyways canned tuna should be limited per week and I mean, at most you’ll be less then a 100 calories off for the whole week if you eat it several times

20. Originally Posted by air2fakie
Just go by what's on the label. You'll go crazy if you start double-checking calorie info on every packaged/canned food item you buy.

Besides, if you don't trust the calories listed on the label, why would you trust the protein, fat and weight amounts listed that you're using as the basis of your own calculations?
I don't trust the calories listed on the label because I did a little research and 90 kcal is a bit low comparing to some other examples. Also, 20% of the products in Russia don't fit the 4/4/9 rule AT ALL. And the tuna featured in my first post would perfect because it's only like 10% off the rule.
Originally Posted by Heisman2
The 4/4/9 numbers are approximations.[/url]

in the US the total calories on the package accounts for this so the total calories is what people should go by. I have no idea what is done in Russia.

In general the best way to do this if you want to track is use the total calories for your calorie count and the specified grams of protein/carbs/fats for your macro counts. As long as you don't eat too much of foods that are significantly different with their Atwater factors (ie, cocoa) this should be fine and require minimal effort/thought.
So If I were in the US, I would use the data on the package to track. I can't imagine buying something in the US that wouldn't be tested in a lab to figure out the value exactly.
But one of the problems in Russia is that I might go grab chicken breast and the label is like 110 kcal 2.5 fat 21 protein per 100g, then I go grab another pack of chicken breast and it is now 157 kcal 5 fat 21 protein. And in fact, it might be of the same origins but packed by different resellers. And for me, that is insane because I consume a ton of protein and over time the margins get pretty high. It matters if you try to get under 8% of BF. But no one is ripped over here so people just laugh at weighing food and all this stuff.

And all this insanity is with unprocessed, simple foods. No one out here seems to care. They just sell chicken breast, none of them has tested it in a lab.

You say the 4/4/9 rule is approximate but I've never seen a US nutrition facts label that would be so damn unprecise. Most of the time it fits the rule perfectly.

So my original question (what multiplier should I go with, 130 or 185) is answered. Thank you, guys!)

In the US you always know the answer because labels say something like "value per 100g of DRAINED tuna". A funny thing is that according to the data from my label in Russian, (see the pic in the 1st post) I should use 185g to count my intake, not 130. Like I take my scales, open up the can and weigh all the contents (with water). That's what the label says.

21. Originally Posted by Heisman2
I have no idea what is done in Russia.
I can tell you what's done here. Let's say we have some pork loin. Some dudes back in like 1975 counted the value and put it into a unified table. And all the food companies now use this data. Now I take 2 packs of pork loin or whatever...The only difference is it is packed by different companies. The more fatty pork is of the same value as a lean one according to the two labels. They just put the data from the 1975 research on the labels. Not all the time, but this is one huge mess in Russia. So my nutrition has really become dieting 'cause I stay away from a lot of things due to inability to count value. Nutrition labels aren't regulated over here.

22. Originally Posted by TheShredded
I don't trust the calories listed on the label because I did a little research and 90 kcal is a bit low comparing to some other examples. Also, 20% of the products in Russia don't fit the 4/4/9 rule AT ALL. And the tuna featured in my first post would perfect because it's only like 10% off the rule.
In that case, are you even sure it's 100% tuna? I'd stick with vodka, can't go wrong there.

23. Originally Posted by TheShredded
Also, 20% of the products in Russia don't fit the 4/4/9 rule AT ALL.
It’s the same anywhere else in the world.

You say the 4/4/9 rule is approximate but I've never seen a US nutrition facts label that would be so damn unprecise.
You haven’t seen much then. This question comes up about twice per month.

24. Originally Posted by air2fakie
In that case, are you even sure it's 100% tuna? I'd stick with vodka, can't go wrong there.
Kid, you're gonna get a bit frustrated because this joke is total BS. Alcohol is for rednecks or something...I don't drink it at all, nor do most people living in Russia. So f*ck that illusion living in your head.

25. Originally Posted by TheShredded
Kid, you're gonna get a bit frustrated because this joke is total BS. Alcohol is for rednecks or something...I don't drink it at all, nor do most people living in Russia. So f*ck that illusion living in your head.
Actually I was referring to Russia's reputation for having quality vodka, and secondarily to my assumption that there'd be no nutrition info on the label for you to scrutinize.

In Soviet Russia, the joke tells you!

26. Originally Posted by TheShredded
Kid, you're gonna get a bit frustrated because this joke is total BS. Alcohol is for rednecks or something...I don't drink it at all, nor do most people living in Russia. So f*ck that illusion living in your head.
Most people living in Russia don't drink? That flies in the face of everything I've heard.

27. Originally Posted by TheShredded
Kid, you're gonna get a bit frustrated because this joke is total BS. Alcohol is for rednecks or something...I don't drink it at all, nor do most people living in Russia. So f*ck that illusion living in your head.
FYI: "Alcohol consumption in Russia remains among the highest in the world."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoho...tion_in_Russia

28. Originally Posted by TheShredded
Kid, you're gonna get a bit frustrated because this joke is total BS. Alcohol is for rednecks or something...I don't drink it at all, nor do most people living in Russia. So f*ck that illusion living in your head.
Maybe try having a few drinks and relaxing a little. Then you wouldn't get so caught up in ~20cals which is absolutely fuk all in the grand scheme of things.

29. Originally Posted by TheShredded
I can tell you what's done here. Let's say we have some pork loin. Some dudes back in like 1975 counted the value and put it into a unified table. And all the food companies now use this data. Now I take 2 packs of pork loin or whatever...The only difference is it is packed by different companies. The more fatty pork is of the same value as a lean one according to the two labels. They just put the data from the 1975 research on the labels. Not all the time, but this is one huge mess in Russia. So my nutrition has really become dieting 'cause I stay away from a lot of things due to inability to count value. Nutrition labels aren't regulated over here.
Word. I go to the Russian store here in America and get pork loin as well (mostly Hungarian). Many of the nutritional labels are hard to understand, even my Ukrainiab/Russian wife has issues with it. Just go by standard nutritional values and approximate as best as you can.

30. Originally Posted by Mrpb
FYI: "Alcohol consumption in Russia remains among the highest in the world."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoho...tion_in_Russia
I read that it is customary to bring a bottle of vodka if you ever visit someone. It is considered rude to leave before the bottle is finished. This was before December 26, 1991 though.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts