200 calories
January 16, 2007 6:37 PM   Subscribe

What does 200 calories look like? (via)
posted by Kwantsar (34 comments total) 3 users marked this as a favorite

 
Crap. You're making me hungry.
posted by IronLizard at 6:39 PM on January 16, 2007


Only 150 Calories, almost a fortnight's worth of Cholesterol.
posted by Frank Grimes at 6:45 PM on January 16, 2007 [4 favorites]


Wtf. These are not Smarties. These are Smarties.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 6:45 PM on January 16, 2007


(via)
posted by interrobang at 6:46 PM on January 16, 2007 [1 favorite]


Wtf. These are not Smarties. These are Smarties.

I don't get it. How do you crush and snort these Smarties?
posted by cosmonaught at 6:51 PM on January 16, 2007 [1 favorite]


Cool!
posted by Ricky_gr10 at 6:51 PM on January 16, 2007


I think the photographer made an interesting (read: bad) choice in giving these photographs absolutely no sense of scale. That dab of peanut butter? That slab of butter? The measurement in the caption is much more informative than the photograph.
posted by mr_roboto at 6:53 PM on January 16, 2007


This is so depressing...
posted by AwkwardPause at 6:59 PM on January 16, 2007


that coca cola is way more than 200 calories. one can of coke is about 180 calories.
posted by Maias at 6:59 PM on January 16, 2007


So hungry now, and for all the wrong things.
posted by Iron Rat at 7:04 PM on January 16, 2007


I think the photographer made an interesting (read: bad) choice in giving these photographs absolutely no sense of scale. That dab of peanut butter? That slab of butter? The measurement in the caption is much more informative than the photograph.

The pictures given are thumbnails. If you click on them, you get the real photos, which all include the same plate. Thus, we get a sense of relative scale.
posted by TypographicalError at 7:10 PM on January 16, 2007 [1 favorite]


mr_roboto: agreed. I was going to link to picture of 1 lb of fat/ 1 lb of muscle as a corollary, but there's no objective scale to any of the pictures I've found. Maybe it's the size of a gnat, maybe it's size of the moon, who knows.
posted by boo_radley at 7:14 PM on January 16, 2007


TypographicalError writes "If you click on them, you get the real photos, which all include the same plate. "

Not with a middle click to open a new tab in firefox, you don't (which is why I didn't realize this). Stupid Web 2.0.
posted by mr_roboto at 7:17 PM on January 16, 2007


It made me realize how little I eat. 2000 calories a day seems like an awful lot.
posted by thebigdeadwaltz at 7:21 PM on January 16, 2007


What I found fascinating is that balsamic vinegar is more calorie-dense than coke. Well, that and just how calorie-dense bread and cereals are.
posted by jedicus at 7:29 PM on January 16, 2007


I'm blown away by the fact that a bagel has so many more calories than a donut. And that such a tiny amount of cornmeal has 200 calories. Or peanut butter compared to bacon.

Wow.

I wish fat content was some how cross-referenced.
posted by M.C. Lo-Carb! at 7:40 PM on January 16, 2007


Holy Carp, Frank Grimes, that is an amazing product.

All the cholesterol in the world, and the wrath of Yahweh as well. It would only be *less* kosher if it were wrapped in lobster.

(And this is a neat post, though it is making me think that Jelly Bellys and Coke would make a pretty swell meal right about now.)
posted by grapefruitmoon at 8:06 PM on January 16, 2007


This looks like educational food. If you vary the scale, how about 200 burritos seen from 20 feet of altitude on a field of orange formica?
posted by longsleeves at 8:17 PM on January 16, 2007


What kind of sick individual uses the word mauve to sell candy to children?
posted by nebulawindphone at 8:36 PM on January 16, 2007


the mauvers and shakers?
posted by greatgefilte at 8:49 PM on January 16, 2007


Sesame Seed Bagel
70 grams = 200 Calories

Glazed Doughnut
52 grams = 200 Calories

sorry, donut wins..
posted by dminor at 9:12 PM on January 16, 2007


Hungry.
posted by JWright at 9:13 PM on January 16, 2007


well, but by size of the portion...

aww, crap.
posted by M.C. Lo-Carb! at 9:17 PM on January 16, 2007


omg Frank Grimes, I cannot believe there is actually something called Pork Brains in Milk Gravy. *gag* and it's suggested use is to mix it with scrambled eggs! yikes. (But then there's also instant jellyfish.)

Ooodles of Noodles Top Ramen is only 190 calories per packet.
posted by nickyskye at 9:47 PM on January 16, 2007


Does it seem strange to anyone else that the canned black beans and the canned pork and beans are exactly the same? Not because of the pork, but because the, um, sauce, or whatever you want to call it, on the pork and beans is like pure corn syrup. It makes me rather skeptical about the accuracy of this information...
posted by XMLicious at 10:02 PM on January 16, 2007


The Bailey's made me cry. I still don't know how big that shot is in relation to a "normal" shot, but I've had many an over-poured shot of Bailey's at my local watering hole, and am realizing that it probably represented many many hundreds of calories. Sweet friggin' jesus.

stares dejectedly at belly, wonders how many of those pounds are just from Bailey's on the rocks
posted by hincandenza at 10:32 PM on January 16, 2007


That shot of Bailey's is just over 2 ounces. That glass looks like it's at least 6 ounces - it's definitely not a shot glass (1 to 1.5 ounces).
posted by concrete at 1:19 AM on January 17, 2007


Kind of a weird way to think about food, but the pictures are nice. It's frustrating not to be able to compare them visually simultaneously on that plate.

I'm blown away by the fact that a bagel has so many more calories than a donut. And that such a tiny amount of cornmeal has 200 calories. Or peanut butter compared to bacon.

You mean because they had to cut away more of the bagel than they did of the donut? The bagel is heavier, but with less grease in it, it does "win" in terms of lower calorie density per weight.

Peanut butter and cornmeal -- I think you have to think of how much empty air is in the bacon as displayed or say bread versus the cornmeal.

2/3 cup of the porkbrains thingie has 5 grams of fat? I think I'll have a hazelnut truffle instead. :)
posted by Listener at 1:25 AM on January 17, 2007


Wtf. These are not Smarties. These are Smarties.

They stopped being Smarties when they stopped putting a letter on the inside of the top. They were educational chocolates, now they're just chocolates with hard crusty shells that cut my gums where my teeth would be if I hadn't been convinced of the educational value of chocolate as a child.
posted by vbfg at 1:58 AM on January 17, 2007


Ahhh the pasta one made my day :) 150 grams of cooked pasta = 200 calories . Pasta eaters know it's quite a lot and very fulfilling, slow release carbs.

I checked the alimighty nutritional database which confirms the numbers. That of course is raw cooked pasta, one must add some flavouring.

The idea of calory equivalency + pictures , that's interesting but I really don't get why didn't they use some comparison scale object ?
posted by elpapacito at 1:58 AM on January 17, 2007


I guess it's all the pretzels I'm eating every night that's the problem then.

I'll just suck on packets of Splenda in front of the TV for now on.
posted by gfrobe at 2:57 AM on January 17, 2007


elpapacito : "I really don't get why didn't they use some comparison scale object ?"

They did, but they used an annoying AJAX-y (dunno if it's actually AJAX or not) interface that means that middle clicking on images doesn't do anything, but if you left-click on the image old-skool style, a window pops up showing the portion on a plate, and the same plate is used for every image. Would've been much more obvious if they'd tried less to be fancy and cutting-edge.
posted by Bugbread at 4:54 AM on January 17, 2007


I was amused by this claim that coitus interruptus would equal 130 grams of glazed donut. I guess Leonard Cohen was right.
posted by synechist at 8:09 AM on January 17, 2007


(Yes, I realize the first site is intended to be humorous).
posted by synechist at 8:11 AM on January 17, 2007


« Older Genius at work....  |  There are Klingons in the Whit... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments