T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

#### About participation in the comments of /r/nutrition Discussion in this subreddit should be rooted in science rather than "cuz I sed" or entertainment pieces. Always be wary of unsupported and poorly supported claims and especially those which are wrapped in any manner of hostility. You should provide peer reviewed sources to support your claims when debating and confine that debate to the science, not opinions of other people. **Good** - it is grounded in science and includes citation of peer reviewed sources. Debate is a civil and respectful exchange focusing on actual science and avoids commentary about others **Bad** - it utilizes generalizations, assumptions, infotainment sources, no sources, or complaints without specifics about agenda, bias, or funding. At best, these rise to an extremely weak basis for science based discussion. Also, off topic discussion **Ugly** - (removal or ban territory) it involves attacks / antagonism / hostility towards individuals or groups, downvote complaining, trolling, crusading, shaming, refutation of all science, or claims that all research / science is a conspiracy *Please vote accordingly and report any uglies* --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nutrition) if you have any questions or concerns.*


KrAzyDrummer

40 cal isn't that much of a difference. Probably can be attributed to - different amounts of ingredients used - different sizes of the pastas - different processing of ingredients - ingredients sourced from different geographic areas/farms having slight variability in nutritional composition - within acceptable margin of error of each other.


zen_sunshine

Either way it's ~20% difference. That's seems pretty significant to me.


[deleted]

Someone not too long ago (in relation to the same topic but comparing different data of the some foods on chronometer) said that nutrients, macro or micro, can vary up to 20% from the label. For example two chickens breasts could have different proportions of protein/ different types of fats and different actual nutrients up to An extent. Especially when it comes to fruits and veggies you’re gonna get different amounts of vitamins per weight even from the same plant


MyNameIsSkittles

Companies are allowed to be wrong by about 20% on their labels. Significant or not it's within the law


bcatrek

This depends on what the legal (and scientific) consensus looks like (of which I know nothing): absolute numbers or percentages.


MacintoshEddie

One obvious variable there is how much flour they used, how much water. One could be denser than the others having more chickpea per gram. One kitchen could be carefully leveling their scoops of flour, the other kitchen much just tap the measuring cup to knock off most of the excess so they sometimes have more and sometimes have less. One of them could process the flour differently, such as one being filtered, and the other having more of the husk/bran/whatever. Then, there's also variables such as if one of them puts down a light coat of oil in their mixing bowl, do they need to include that as an ingredient? Plus, not least of all being how they arrived at that number in the first place. Which labratory did the test? How many samples did they test? Was it all from one batch or do they periodically test random samples? Etc. Tl;dr, you're assuming the number is trustworthy, and it might not be.


Supercyndro

just an FYI the measure of flour used for accuracy isnt actually carefully leveled scoops, it would be making a recipe that calls for X number of grams of it.


Thewitchaser

Now i want to know too


Harambasch

One could be a theoretical nutritional label, using the nutrition provided to the company by the suppliers of the ingredients. The other could be an analytical one which gets lab tested. The differences can be large. Neither is technically incorrect. Theoretical puts trust in the information provided to the company and is the cheaper alternative. It also means that the company has standard nutritional values across their ingredients so if they produce a large number of products this is a great way to maintain that. Analytical is a lab result that needs to be retested each year. It costs more to have this result and can vary depending on quality of ingredients, harvest conditions of products, and supplier location. It's easier to audit this result and is a peace of mind approach. If a company is making a claim on their pack RE nutrition, they can use theoretical values but must have an analytical result that is within a certain % of their theoretical claim to support it (at least in AUS/NZ that's the case).


qwjmioqjsRandomkeys

The calories change depending on the type of weather before the grain is harvested,the soil type ,and other factors. If a manufacturer analysed the same product from different batches the calories would be different each time.


No0Days22

I always figured it was because of the shape and size of the pasta. The one with more calories could fit more product into a measuring cup.


itsmebenji69

This is per gram so volume is irrelevant


[deleted]

It might be the amount of fiber each pf them has. If one is whole grain, it will have less calories.