(Ignore how gross my scale is)
Bought these trufru strawberries in an attempt to find a lower cal chocolate treat with a little more volume. Suggested serving size was 28g/2-3 strawberries.
Most of the strawberries in the bag were the size of the bigger one on the left and are easily 1+ serving by themselves.
This is why a kitchen scale is so important, I could have easily been eating 270 calories per serving thinking I was having 90. Not a terrible thing but doesn’t fit in my plan.
by lilbitmeow
9 Comments
This is exactly why I now completely disregard serving sizes and only pay attention to serving *weight.*
tru fru aren’t even a low cal snack imo
Do you even need a scale? It’s 2160 kcal per container. Divide it up as you wish.
This took me a few months to realize and I understand why the weight was not coming off. It’s also easy to eat a few servings….
I mean. Every calories listed on every package in the US is allowed a 20% swing in either direction.
Love tru fru! I wonder how the bigger berries affect the calories? Because more strawberry flesh could weigh a lot more, but you aren’t getting too much more surface area of chocolate. (Time for the high school math problem! lol)
Seeing the scale on ounces instead of grams threw me off
Well, yea, not 2-3 of the size of the one on the right. You try 2 of the size of the one on the left? Serving size is still accurate, it’s telling you per ounce and how many grams the serving is. The “about” is an estimate since they can’t control the size of a natural product that comes in various shapes and sizes.
How big are the rest of them in the bag? Did you just pick one absolutely gargantuan strawberry to weigh here?
Edit: I looked them up. Apparently, three to four of them are supposed to fit comfortably in one’s palm. And the size of an average, medium piece is the size of a standard gumball or large marble, with the biggest pieces still being only about 1 inch in diameter. So you’ve got a freakishly large one here, which very easily explains the weight discrepancy.