Calories and protein content raw Vs cooked?

[FH93]

I eat mainly beef, but that's not the relevant part here. What is relevant, is that the nutritional information on my steak is listed (as sold), so basically while raw, and says it has 122 calories, and 22.6g protein.

When I cook the 750g of steak, it reduces in weight to 490g, on average. In the 750g of steak, there should be about 900 calories, and 170g protein.

My question is, is there 900 calories and 170g protein in the 490g cooked steak? Beef is expensive enough and if I'm overeating protein I'd prefer to know, cause I can either reduce my beef costs, or stop drinking my protein shakes to make up the protein as I've been working off 490g cooked steak with the (as sold) nutrition.

 

[Bumpygooch]

I eat mainly beef, but that's not the relevant part here. What is relevant, is that the nutritional information on my steak is listed (as sold), so basically while raw, and says it has 122 calories, and 22.6g protein.

When I cook the 750g of steak, it reduces in weight to 490g, on average. In the 750g of steak, there should be about 900 calories, and 170g protein.

My question is, is there 900 calories and 170g protein in the 490g cooked steak? Beef is expensive enough and if I'm overeating protein I'd prefer to know, cause I can either reduce my beef costs, or stop drinking my protein shakes to make up the protein as I've been working off 490g cooked steak with the (as sold) nutrition.

If you’re weighing and logging it raw. Then cooking and eating that exact portion, it is still precisely what you logged before cooking. The protein/fat content doesn’t magically disappear.

 

[theotherguy]

If you’re weighing and logging it raw. Then cooking and eating that exact portion, it is still precisely what you logged before cooking. The protein/fat content doesn’t magically disappear.

Well, you can render and drain off the fat. Beef usually loses somewhere in the ballpark of 25% of its weight once cooked. According to the OP, it’s losing closer to 35%, which make me believe he isn’t buying lean cuts.

With that said, I do agree that protein content doesn’t change, but overall calorie count can

EDIT: after redoing the math, 24g fat vs 170g protein is fairly pretty lean. But it still could be losing some fat

 

[Bumpygooch]

Well, you can render and drain off the fat. Beef usually loses somewhere in the ballpark of 25% of its weight once cooked. According to the OP, it’s losing closer to 35%, which make me believe he isn’t buying lean cuts.

With that said, I do agree that protein content doesn’t change, but overall calorie count can

I took that into account when I qualified it “that exact portion.”

 

[theotherguy]

I took that into account when I qualified it “that exact portion.”

I guess I don’t understand what you’re saying, because it seems to me that you’re saying that if he weighs out 750g of steak and then eats it after cooking it down to 490g, that the calorie/macro content is still the same before and after cooking.

But if the fat is rendered and then drained off, how is the calorie/macro content still the same? It would no longer be the same portion if some of the fat was drained off.

You can turn 85% lean ground beef into damn near 98% lean by cooking, draining off the fat, rinsing in hot water and then turning around and burning it (a little more than well done, not burnt per se)

 

[Bumpygooch]

I guess I don’t understand what you’re saying, because it seems to me that you’re saying that if he weighs out 750g of steak and then eats it after cooking it down to 490g, that the calorie/macro content is still the same before and after cooking.

But if the fat is rendered and then drained off, how is the calorie/macro content still the same? It would no longer be the same portion if some of the fat was drained off.

You can turn 85% lean ground beef into damn near 98% lean by cooking, draining off the fat, rinsing in hot water and then turning around and burning it (a little more than well done, not burnt per se)

If you cook and eat everything from the pan in which it was cooked, the macros don’t change from raw, hence the “that exsct portion” qualification. Rendering and subsequently dumping fat off of cooked ground beef is of course different. Good luck logging that accurately.

 

[theotherguy]

If you cook and eat everything from the pan in which it was cooked, the macros don’t change from raw, hence the “that exsct portion” qualification. Rendering and subsequently dumping fat off of cooked ground beef is of course different. Good luck logging that accurately.

Gotcha, you were saying to eat without draining anything off.

To go deeper down a trivial rabbit hole here, you could weigh the amount of fat drained off by dumping it into a bowl on a scale. I bring this up as a critical thinking point, not an argument.

 

[Bumpygooch]

Gotcha, you were saying to eat without draining anything off.

To go deeper down a trivial rabbit hole here, you could weigh the amount of fat drained off by dumping it into a bowl on a scale. I bring this up as a critical thinking point, not an argument.

Yes, however, the problem becomes what’s water and what’s fat with shitty supermarket meat.

 

[Canknucklehead]

The protein content will be the same.

 

[FH93]

I really should have qualified that I don't care about the calories, but only the protein, and was using the calories as an added number to help with the explanation, as it seemed to have sparked a bigger debate.

But thank you everyone for the answers,

 

[Ferenor]

Don't stress too much on it, start logging raw or cooked and be consistent with it, i tell you this from personal experience lol