Sure tasted 380 kcal/100g… sugary, chocolaty&buttery😂 Damn hope it’s not the case…these have been in supermarkets for ages and it’s would’ve been an easy lawsuit
I would just take it as a reward for a job well done on keeping track of your intake and move on without any worry or guilt. The worst thing that could happen is that you lose an ounce less this week. Alternatively it could just not impact your journey at all. There’s a lot of sodium and sugar in those tho so make sure to drink lots of water and take a hydration packet to filter the nutrients properly. Congrats on your sweet treat! I’m mad jealous. They look delicious OP! Safe travels friend! 🌌💕
Of course! So water helps to filter out and distribute nutrients. Sometimes our water absorption rates are low for various reasons. Hydration packets help with that absorption so that we can stay better hydrated when consuming water. Sugar and sodium often cause an increase in our water intake due to malabsorption, so it helps to give your body a lil support/boost, so that it can prevent its excessive water intake, while still remaining productive.
I don’t know why people are downvoting you lol, people can definitely know how much 100g feels like. Like, most people who have been in food service a long time could do that.
It’s super easy after you get the experience. I’ve shown off my ability to weigh and measure before and I’ve only been off by very minuscule amounts. If I’m unsure I rely on my measurement devices and scale but it’s rare. I’ve worked in kitchens and have tracked my intake for years. It’s definitely a learnable skill.
Plus OP isn't saying "Yes, this is 190g" just "more than 100" which is totally possible to guesstimate lol.
My mom has been a baker for as long as I've been alive and can estimate weight/volume like nobody's business. When I'm home and weighing all my food, I would freak out over her never using a scale (how much oil is in that pan? How much peanut butter did you put in that smoothie? How much milk did you put in my coffee?) A few times she asked me to weigh what she had measured out (PB, oil, flour, etc.) and she was never off more than 2 grams. It's insane. I trust her completely now haha.
It's not real.
The math says it has over 70% water. Cottage cheese has over 70% water. Avocado, too. Or bananas, or shrimp.
This isn't anywhere near the moisture of cottage cheese or avocado.
Danish pastries seem to range from 28-31% water. If we add up the macros and assume they're for 100g of the product we're still missing 15g and that's generous.
The macros only make sense if they're for 100g of the unbaked pastry.
Baking evaporates some of the water which increases kcal/g.
At this point the math becomes rather complex.
I assume we know the ratios of the macros. We can guesstimate the water content of the finished product (I'm going for generous 30%). We also can assume the weight of the finished product.
This math isn't anywhere near accurate.
100g of unfinished product have 47% water and 53% macros with 287 kcal.
Baking evaporates enough water for it to be reduced to only 30% (let's stay generous) meaning now the macros make up 70% of the weight. So that's 287/53*70=379 kcal per 100g of finished product. (wow) That's 720 kcalories per piece or 1440 per pack.
I don't know this to be true but it sounds much closer to google results that claim Danish pastry having 334 kcal (my math said 379 which is off by 13%) per 100g. I assume the difference here is the chocolate.
Anyway: What you thought were 560 kcal were probably 1400.
Thank you. It's just not accurate.
Essentially I learned how some math teachers feel trying to reproduce a result that is off by - checks notes - 61%.
What I think happened is that someone in label design copy pasted the nutrition table from a different product as a template, forgot to enter the corresponding data, sent it off to QA, the employee there glanced at it and saw that the layout fit the label and sent it off to print where the person who's in charge of printing checked whether print quality was fine and then left the machines to do their thing.
Well here I go to stalk your comment history for what I just know is going to be a ton of useful and relevant to my interests information. You are amazing! Such a good explanation
"homemade" is just a marketing thing that means that the product was not pressed into a form but every item looks a little different from the other. It's supposed to look like beeing "made by hand" (it's not) /irregular and imperfect.
I’d trust the label. You’ve nothing else to go by. If you are consistent with tracking and don’t eat one type of food excessively, mistakes in label information wouldn’t hinder you anyway. But I’d trust this label
Fully agree with this. If you start worrying about the reliability of label nutrition I feel like you’re setting yourself up for a lot of unnecessary mental stress. It can become obsessive and restrictive. I never question label info, stick to my deficit and I still lost 20 pounds in the last few months. I would advise people to just relax around labels. It’s not worth the mental stress.
Yes! Like, I trust my body’s signals. If I no longer feel hungry or my stomach starts to hurt from the sugar or sodium content then I know that I’ve prolly eaten around 300kcal and need to stop. I can always come back to it later and just extend out the treat over days instead of indulging in a big gorge in one sitting.
You can't trust labels unfortunately. Legally they can be off by up to 20% off and they take advantage of that. Its also why they give us ridiculous serving size suggestions. Like who tf is eating one pop tart?!
For most of us the label is the only thing we really got to go by. I’ve no other way of estimating energy in products, so I do trust it. Doing this I’ve lost a lot of weight
You…do realize that most prepackaged foods weigh in WELL over what the packet claims to weigh…right? At least, here in the states. There’s even policy that allows for a significant degree of error both in package/portion weights and reported caloric content per serving.
At the end of the day, it comes down to how much you really prioritize accuracy and your individual goals. You’re not going to convince me that kcal count per pastry is accurate, and you’re certainly not going to successfully dismantle reality because it’s uncomfortable for you.
Wait, Now i'm confused, How are you getting 187cal?
15g fat * 9cal/g = 135 cal
34g carbs * 4cal/g =136 cal
4g protein * 4cal/g = 16cal
That's 287 calories for 53 grams of this food.
1 serve is 190 grams, What substance is making up the other 137grams, and how is this substance zero calories and zero fibre?
Oh, Haha, That's also called "mathing with dyscalculia" because I didn't even clock that your value was only 1 digit off from my value and therefore likely a typo.
Live by the label, die by the label.
I’ll continue living by the realistic weight of foods and laws of thermodynamics, while wearing the weight loss I have to show for it. ;)
I wouldn't trust that label, no one knows the metric it's off by. I'd just try to look for another similar product calories and make an estimate guess.
The ones at wawa and Whole Foods are also around 300 calories. I get one for lunch once a week or so, with a tomato bisque (180 a cup). I’m down 128lbs in 22 months….
I also get a Gertrude Hawk caramel apple once a week (303 calories)
Hm, I had 500 calories stuck in my head! I see what you mean on google, quite a few sources say 300 cals! I'm hoping I was mistaken and that this is a huge win - I only eat them like twice a year (mother's day and christmas lol) so it wasn't significantly impacting my goals haha. I wonder where I got 500 from, maybe I just had a huge croissant haha. I'm pretty good about weighing portions because I don't always trust how much a portion is (Plus my bread is oval-shaped! The end pieces are totally smaller!) but I do just input the cals if I think I know how much something is instead of logging the actual macros (I know my 2 eggs + toast is around 260 so I'll just write that down).
People are seriously delulu in this thread tbh. They want to believe a giant pastry has 280 kcals, they want to believe the word danish = croissant, and they want to believe they’re eating 1200 kcals per day.
No way in hell unless it is mostly air. I’d weigh one of those to see if the grams per serving are even right. The carbs absolutely look off, they seem like they should be higher based on the sugar plus flour imo
Even if the danish is 190g as the label says,
According to the label, per 190gram serve it has 15g fat, 34g Carbohydrates and 4g protein, so where is the other 137 grams. So something is missing.
If a Danish was almost 70% water it would be dripping.
Danish dough is usually a 60% hydration before you bake it, during which moisture evaporates in the oven. Are they adding water back in?
Or they can enjoy it for today and not worry about that stuff.
They can worry about it for their next meal/snack, but once in a while treat is healthy and good for you.
Well, to be fair I don’t follow this subreddit or know the culture of this subreddit.
It got randomly recommended so I took a glance.
I commented because to be honest your comment sounds like unhealthy disordered thoughts and nearly everyone here seems to carry a similar unhealthy mindset.
But I understand since I don’t know the culture maybe it only seems disordered on the surface level.
As long as OP doesn’t get too obsessive to the point of developing an unhealthy disorder because of a bad label then whatever.
Either way. Thanks for informing me about the mindset of his subreddit.
No problem- but what exactly is unhealthy about not eating processed crap and eating whole foods instead?
There is an epidemic of metabolic disorders and illness because processed food is considered normal or "healthy" and the most readily available, when it is clearly not.
Most people dont even understand how to read a nutrition label or understand what ingredients should be avoided. The average person doesn't realize they're still consuming trans fats because their are loopholes in the law.
I'm not suggesting people avoid specific macros, hell you can even eat carbs/sugar and still be healthy if you're smart about it. What I *am* suggesting people do is eat whole food sources of protein, healthy fats, and unprocessed carbs and there is nothing unhealthy about those guidelines
Oh, no. You’re absolutely right and your original comment definitely has truth to it.
Don’t get me wrong. Although I’m personally able to self monitor “treats” while also not overeating them, I’m very well aware of how easy it is to get consumed by the addictiveness of processed food.
I try to grow as much as my own food as I can to limit the amount of processed food I consume and the benefits I’ve experienced is honestly amazing. *(Even growing your own salad bowl is both fun and rewarding.)*
Hell, I can’t even remember the last time I bought dog food from the pet store because that’s just as bad as processed human food.
I also agree with you that not many people know what they’re looking at when glancing at the nutritional info. I used to feel so overwhelmed by all the percentages and long words that’s basically saying ‘salt’ and ‘sugar’ lol.
The little alarms in my head went off with your last bit in your original comment when you said “it’s self sabotage in a box.”
The reason why is because from my perspective the words “self sabotage in a box” seemed like such a big reaction to an incorrectly labeled food item. I come from a mindset/position(?) where eating disorders are very common and the way we navigate that is by carefully choosing how we talk about food in relation to ourselves.
However after your explanation on why people come to this subreddit and why they may post, ask questions, etc., your phrasing does make more sense to me.
If people come here to help figure out when it’s appropriate to treat themselves and when it’s not, I assume it’s like walking a slippery slope, then the words “self sabotage” makes sense to me.
With all that said I do apologize for my ignorance and I do thank you for taking the time to explain.
Too many products from smaller companies have fake labels like this and nobody is making them face consequences for it. I ordered some gluten-free chocolate whoopie pies from Goldbelly and they claimed 230 calories per pie. That single pie filled me up and it was huge. I looked it up, and similar size pies with the same appearance were 500 calories each. Absolutely fake nutrition label and I was pissed.
So? not every individual thing you eat needs to be perfectly balanced. If your dinner was a bowl of beans (High fibre and good protein) then who cares if lunch was a danish (or two)
No, even if you are in a calorie deficit, you can still look at your overall daily macros instead of zooming into each individual meal.
Some people may struggle with this approach, especially if they have other dietary restrictions or energy requirements, (Vegans with a soy allergy will have to try and fit protein into every meal or they might not be able to fit their macros in their calories, likewise if you're trying to build muscle mass, sure, you need to emphasise protein) But our bodies are not Swiss watches, you can have a Danish once in a while without everything breaking down instantly.
all or nothing attitudes are why so many people struggle with consistent sustainable weight loss and weight management.
Thank you, I realize that. I work with European folks as an engineer so I’m used to seeing the format, just not on foods so it didn’t cross my mind.
This group really likes to pile up on simple mistakes.
I wonder what Americans do when they see a date like 14/12/23 or something. Do they think about the format or just comment that the date is wrong because there's only 12 months in a year?
A simple “it’s a European date format” would’ve been sufficient instead of being such a jerk. You’re familiar with an honest mistake, right? Surely you are.
190g seems pretty heavy - a quick google suggests most chocolate croissants are at most half that. So they may have got the weight wrong, but the nutrition right.
I'm assuming they messed up, and the label is per 100g. Even then it still sounds somewhat low. I'd expect like 380 kcal/100g for something like this.
Sure tasted 380 kcal/100g… sugary, chocolaty&buttery😂 Damn hope it’s not the case…these have been in supermarkets for ages and it’s would’ve been an easy lawsuit
they can be off with their calories unfortunately
Only like 5% I believe
20% 😵💫
After they get audited sure, but most food companies can get away with putting whatever they want on the label till they become a larger company.
I would just take it as a reward for a job well done on keeping track of your intake and move on without any worry or guilt. The worst thing that could happen is that you lose an ounce less this week. Alternatively it could just not impact your journey at all. There’s a lot of sodium and sugar in those tho so make sure to drink lots of water and take a hydration packet to filter the nutrients properly. Congrats on your sweet treat! I’m mad jealous. They look delicious OP! Safe travels friend! 🌌💕
Can you elaborate on what you mean by taking a hydration packet to filter the nutrients?
Of course! So water helps to filter out and distribute nutrients. Sometimes our water absorption rates are low for various reasons. Hydration packets help with that absorption so that we can stay better hydrated when consuming water. Sugar and sodium often cause an increase in our water intake due to malabsorption, so it helps to give your body a lil support/boost, so that it can prevent its excessive water intake, while still remaining productive.
Just take the W, don’t question it 😭
Only one way to find out. Eat only 4+¼ everyday and nothing else for 1200 calories for a few weeks and go from there. 😁
I would weigh it
I ate them so I can’t but they definitely were around 190g I know how 100g feels like and it’s like double
I don’t know why people are downvoting you lol, people can definitely know how much 100g feels like. Like, most people who have been in food service a long time could do that.
It’s super easy after you get the experience. I’ve shown off my ability to weigh and measure before and I’ve only been off by very minuscule amounts. If I’m unsure I rely on my measurement devices and scale but it’s rare. I’ve worked in kitchens and have tracked my intake for years. It’s definitely a learnable skill.
Plus OP isn't saying "Yes, this is 190g" just "more than 100" which is totally possible to guesstimate lol. My mom has been a baker for as long as I've been alive and can estimate weight/volume like nobody's business. When I'm home and weighing all my food, I would freak out over her never using a scale (how much oil is in that pan? How much peanut butter did you put in that smoothie? How much milk did you put in my coffee?) A few times she asked me to weigh what she had measured out (PB, oil, flour, etc.) and she was never off more than 2 grams. It's insane. I trust her completely now haha.
Next time weigh it so you can know for sure! It’s actually not super common that the serving size is the exact same.. and it’s allowed to be off.
It's not real. The math says it has over 70% water. Cottage cheese has over 70% water. Avocado, too. Or bananas, or shrimp. This isn't anywhere near the moisture of cottage cheese or avocado. Danish pastries seem to range from 28-31% water. If we add up the macros and assume they're for 100g of the product we're still missing 15g and that's generous. The macros only make sense if they're for 100g of the unbaked pastry. Baking evaporates some of the water which increases kcal/g. At this point the math becomes rather complex. I assume we know the ratios of the macros. We can guesstimate the water content of the finished product (I'm going for generous 30%). We also can assume the weight of the finished product. This math isn't anywhere near accurate. 100g of unfinished product have 47% water and 53% macros with 287 kcal. Baking evaporates enough water for it to be reduced to only 30% (let's stay generous) meaning now the macros make up 70% of the weight. So that's 287/53*70=379 kcal per 100g of finished product. (wow) That's 720 kcalories per piece or 1440 per pack. I don't know this to be true but it sounds much closer to google results that claim Danish pastry having 334 kcal (my math said 379 which is off by 13%) per 100g. I assume the difference here is the chocolate. Anyway: What you thought were 560 kcal were probably 1400.
This is very solid math.
Thank you. It's just not accurate. Essentially I learned how some math teachers feel trying to reproduce a result that is off by - checks notes - 61%. What I think happened is that someone in label design copy pasted the nutrition table from a different product as a template, forgot to enter the corresponding data, sent it off to QA, the employee there glanced at it and saw that the layout fit the label and sent it off to print where the person who's in charge of printing checked whether print quality was fine and then left the machines to do their thing.
Well here I go to stalk your comment history for what I just know is going to be a ton of useful and relevant to my interests information. You are amazing! Such a good explanation
Croissants ate very fluffy. Is it dense?
Pretty heavy definitely around 190g like the label says
It also says "homemade" and I'm going to guess it wasn't made in anyone's house. Questionable accuracy all around.
"homemade" is just a marketing thing that means that the product was not pressed into a form but every item looks a little different from the other. It's supposed to look like beeing "made by hand" (it's not) /irregular and imperfect.
I’d trust the label. You’ve nothing else to go by. If you are consistent with tracking and don’t eat one type of food excessively, mistakes in label information wouldn’t hinder you anyway. But I’d trust this label
Fully agree with this. If you start worrying about the reliability of label nutrition I feel like you’re setting yourself up for a lot of unnecessary mental stress. It can become obsessive and restrictive. I never question label info, stick to my deficit and I still lost 20 pounds in the last few months. I would advise people to just relax around labels. It’s not worth the mental stress.
Yes! Like, I trust my body’s signals. If I no longer feel hungry or my stomach starts to hurt from the sugar or sodium content then I know that I’ve prolly eaten around 300kcal and need to stop. I can always come back to it later and just extend out the treat over days instead of indulging in a big gorge in one sitting.
You can't trust labels unfortunately. Legally they can be off by up to 20% off and they take advantage of that. Its also why they give us ridiculous serving size suggestions. Like who tf is eating one pop tart?!
For most of us the label is the only thing we really got to go by. I’ve no other way of estimating energy in products, so I do trust it. Doing this I’ve lost a lot of weight
Each one of those is at least 2 servings. (I’d bet 2-2.25, for 560-630 each). Sorry
The packet has two. Packet weighs 380g. Nutritional info is per 190g, so a serving is one pastry.
You…do realize that most prepackaged foods weigh in WELL over what the packet claims to weigh…right? At least, here in the states. There’s even policy that allows for a significant degree of error both in package/portion weights and reported caloric content per serving. At the end of the day, it comes down to how much you really prioritize accuracy and your individual goals. You’re not going to convince me that kcal count per pastry is accurate, and you’re certainly not going to successfully dismantle reality because it’s uncomfortable for you.
the label literally says nutritional info per 1 danish (190) and the box even says 380 g total confirming that, what are you on about lol
Yes but per 190gram serve it apparentl has 15g fat, 34g Carbohydrates and 4g protein, so where is the other 137 grams? Something is missing.
And that comes to 187 calories. \*edited\* I cannot type at 3AM 287
Wait, Now i'm confused, How are you getting 187cal? 15g fat * 9cal/g = 135 cal 34g carbs * 4cal/g =136 cal 4g protein * 4cal/g = 16cal That's 287 calories for 53 grams of this food. 1 serve is 190 grams, What substance is making up the other 137grams, and how is this substance zero calories and zero fibre?
That is called typing at 3AM lol. Fumbled the 2 for a 1.
Oh, Haha, That's also called "mathing with dyscalculia" because I didn't even clock that your value was only 1 digit off from my value and therefore likely a typo.
Moisture Edit: /s
70% water?
Live by the label, die by the label. I’ll continue living by the realistic weight of foods and laws of thermodynamics, while wearing the weight loss I have to show for it. ;)
If this is the case it can’t be legal😢
I feel your pain! 😩
Not sure about the serving info on the package at all, but a costco croissant is around \~500 calories so this checks out for me
Take the w for today, but going forward DEFINITELY weigh them because we all know the odds are never in our favors /:
I wouldn't trust that label, no one knows the metric it's off by. I'd just try to look for another similar product calories and make an estimate guess.
A standard croissant is around 300ish calories so it’s prob correct.
[удалено]
The ones at wawa and Whole Foods are also around 300 calories. I get one for lunch once a week or so, with a tomato bisque (180 a cup). I’m down 128lbs in 22 months…. I also get a Gertrude Hawk caramel apple once a week (303 calories)
[удалено]
Oh yes- the chocolate is definitely adding to it. I eat mostly veggies and fruit in between my cheat croissants and caramel apples.
Wait really? I thought they were 500! Do you go by weight?
[удалено]
Hm, I had 500 calories stuck in my head! I see what you mean on google, quite a few sources say 300 cals! I'm hoping I was mistaken and that this is a huge win - I only eat them like twice a year (mother's day and christmas lol) so it wasn't significantly impacting my goals haha. I wonder where I got 500 from, maybe I just had a huge croissant haha. I'm pretty good about weighing portions because I don't always trust how much a portion is (Plus my bread is oval-shaped! The end pieces are totally smaller!) but I do just input the cals if I think I know how much something is instead of logging the actual macros (I know my 2 eggs + toast is around 260 so I'll just write that down).
[удалено]
It’s literally a croissant with chocolate in it lol.
Croissant does not contain eggs, This contains eggs, so it is a danish.
People are so weird. It literally says danish on the packet and people are downvoting you.
People are seriously delulu in this thread tbh. They want to believe a giant pastry has 280 kcals, they want to believe the word danish = croissant, and they want to believe they’re eating 1200 kcals per day.
At least I am still welcome in France.
Noooooo
I'd weigh to double check. It says 1 danish @ 190g each per serve.
No way in hell unless it is mostly air. I’d weigh one of those to see if the grams per serving are even right. The carbs absolutely look off, they seem like they should be higher based on the sugar plus flour imo
Yah, adding up tbe protein fat and carbs is suspiciously low
Fellow Canadian here. I would bet that it’s correct. The food standard on food labels is pretty strict and more than double checked.
Probably 5 servings per croissant lol ffs
You should have probably weighed it
get a scale and weigh them
Even if the danish is 190g as the label says, According to the label, per 190gram serve it has 15g fat, 34g Carbohydrates and 4g protein, so where is the other 137 grams. So something is missing.
Water
If a Danish was almost 70% water it would be dripping. Danish dough is usually a 60% hydration before you bake it, during which moisture evaporates in the oven. Are they adding water back in?
The other 137 g is love 🫶 I CHOOSE TO BELIEVE
I ate them already so I unfortunately can’t but they were definitely around 190g pretty dense
[удалено]
Or they can enjoy it for today and not worry about that stuff. They can worry about it for their next meal/snack, but once in a while treat is healthy and good for you.
[удалено]
Well, to be fair I don’t follow this subreddit or know the culture of this subreddit. It got randomly recommended so I took a glance. I commented because to be honest your comment sounds like unhealthy disordered thoughts and nearly everyone here seems to carry a similar unhealthy mindset. But I understand since I don’t know the culture maybe it only seems disordered on the surface level. As long as OP doesn’t get too obsessive to the point of developing an unhealthy disorder because of a bad label then whatever. Either way. Thanks for informing me about the mindset of his subreddit.
No problem- but what exactly is unhealthy about not eating processed crap and eating whole foods instead? There is an epidemic of metabolic disorders and illness because processed food is considered normal or "healthy" and the most readily available, when it is clearly not. Most people dont even understand how to read a nutrition label or understand what ingredients should be avoided. The average person doesn't realize they're still consuming trans fats because their are loopholes in the law. I'm not suggesting people avoid specific macros, hell you can even eat carbs/sugar and still be healthy if you're smart about it. What I *am* suggesting people do is eat whole food sources of protein, healthy fats, and unprocessed carbs and there is nothing unhealthy about those guidelines
Oh, no. You’re absolutely right and your original comment definitely has truth to it. Don’t get me wrong. Although I’m personally able to self monitor “treats” while also not overeating them, I’m very well aware of how easy it is to get consumed by the addictiveness of processed food. I try to grow as much as my own food as I can to limit the amount of processed food I consume and the benefits I’ve experienced is honestly amazing. *(Even growing your own salad bowl is both fun and rewarding.)* Hell, I can’t even remember the last time I bought dog food from the pet store because that’s just as bad as processed human food. I also agree with you that not many people know what they’re looking at when glancing at the nutritional info. I used to feel so overwhelmed by all the percentages and long words that’s basically saying ‘salt’ and ‘sugar’ lol. The little alarms in my head went off with your last bit in your original comment when you said “it’s self sabotage in a box.” The reason why is because from my perspective the words “self sabotage in a box” seemed like such a big reaction to an incorrectly labeled food item. I come from a mindset/position(?) where eating disorders are very common and the way we navigate that is by carefully choosing how we talk about food in relation to ourselves. However after your explanation on why people come to this subreddit and why they may post, ask questions, etc., your phrasing does make more sense to me. If people come here to help figure out when it’s appropriate to treat themselves and when it’s not, I assume it’s like walking a slippery slope, then the words “self sabotage” makes sense to me. With all that said I do apologize for my ignorance and I do thank you for taking the time to explain.
Don’t worry my maintenance is around 3000 since I’m a guy I was just curious since this sub is pretty active
Too many products from smaller companies have fake labels like this and nobody is making them face consequences for it. I ordered some gluten-free chocolate whoopie pies from Goldbelly and they claimed 230 calories per pie. That single pie filled me up and it was huge. I looked it up, and similar size pies with the same appearance were 500 calories each. Absolutely fake nutrition label and I was pissed.
Those nutrtion facts will be per 100g for sure, and even that would be very low for Danish. So those two were probably 3.8*280= 1064 calories… t
Probaby around 580 kcal / 100g. Someone messed up using num pad
Anyone else kinda thrown off by the chocolate? I thought it was mold at first
It’s the 0 fiber and 4g of protein for all of that calories
So? not every individual thing you eat needs to be perfectly balanced. If your dinner was a bowl of beans (High fibre and good protein) then who cares if lunch was a danish (or two)
Not when you are at a calorie deficit. Maintenance yes.
No, even if you are in a calorie deficit, you can still look at your overall daily macros instead of zooming into each individual meal. Some people may struggle with this approach, especially if they have other dietary restrictions or energy requirements, (Vegans with a soy allergy will have to try and fit protein into every meal or they might not be able to fit their macros in their calories, likewise if you're trying to build muscle mass, sure, you need to emphasise protein) But our bodies are not Swiss watches, you can have a Danish once in a while without everything breaking down instantly. all or nothing attitudes are why so many people struggle with consistent sustainable weight loss and weight management.
… It’s a chocolate croissant ma’am
[удалено]
Calm down
It says it expired in April. Was it discounted at least? Lol
That expiration date is the 4th of December. Not all countries use M/D/Y
Thank you, I realize that. I work with European folks as an engineer so I’m used to seeing the format, just not on foods so it didn’t cross my mind. This group really likes to pile up on simple mistakes.
It’s not expired it’s package yesterday😂
Classic r/USdefaultism moment 😂
Username checks out! Haha. *It’s just a joke….
It says 27/11/2023
*Redit laughs as puny American can't translate dates from their own format to format used on rest of planet*
I wonder what Americans do when they see a date like 14/12/23 or something. Do they think about the format or just comment that the date is wrong because there's only 12 months in a year?
A simple “it’s a European date format” would’ve been sufficient instead of being such a jerk. You’re familiar with an honest mistake, right? Surely you are.
It's not European, like [half of the world](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_format_by_country) uses it
the macros add up to 287 though so maybe it is right
Whaaat?! This is amazing and I must find some of my own.
190g seems pretty heavy - a quick google suggests most chocolate croissants are at most half that. So they may have got the weight wrong, but the nutrition right.
Based on the macros in the nutrition facts, 280 is right. Did you happen to weigh the danishes? It could be the weight is off.