SomeoneElse@lemmy.worldM to Confidently Incorrect@lemmy.world · 2 years agoI honestly wouldn’t mind having a “calorie weigher”lemmy.worldimagemessage-square4fedilinkarrow-up17arrow-down10
arrow-up17arrow-down1imageI honestly wouldn’t mind having a “calorie weigher”lemmy.worldSomeoneElse@lemmy.worldM to Confidently Incorrect@lemmy.world · 2 years agomessage-square4fedilink
minus-squareBeefPiano@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·2 years agoCalorie weigher. You tell it what the food is and it tells you how many calories are in it based on the weight. Probably not super accurate, but fits the bill.
minus-squareSomeoneElse@lemmy.worldOPMlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·2 years agoI think you’ll find that calories are based on weight and more weight equals more calories. /s
minus-squareSSUPII@sopuli.xyzlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·1 year agoWell, 50 grams of white chocolate have less calories than 100 grams of white chocolate.
minus-squaretotallynotarobot@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 year agoThey both effectively have 0 calories because no one will eat that nonsense.
Calorie weigher. You tell it what the food is and it tells you how many calories are in it based on the weight. Probably not super accurate, but fits the bill.
I think you’ll find that calories are based on weight and more weight equals more calories. /s
Well, 50 grams of white chocolate have less calories than 100 grams of white chocolate.
They both effectively have 0 calories because no one will eat that nonsense.