Chipotle Burrito Bowls

[chrisleakfan4life]

Am i the only one who thinks their nutrition information is off?

They list their bowls in the 400-600 calorie range and just seems extremely low to me.

When i get them i get chicken with rice salsa and cheese, i used this calculator and it comes out to 460 calories which seems extremely low.

http://www.chipotlefan.com/index.php?id=nutrition_calculator

I figure the calorie break down is really like this:

Chicken: 200 calories
Rice: 450
Salsa: 80 calories
cheese: 100

I figure im eating around 800 calories, and that could be a little high or too low.

At Panda Express, you can get a Panda bowl with Steamed Rice and Black Pepper chicken and its around 640 calories and its about the same portion size as this(maybe a little smaller).

Are there calorie listings really that far off?

Their website lists the calorie breakdown as:

Cilantro Lime rice: 130 calories
Chicken: 190 calories
Red Tomato Salsa: 40 calories
Cheese: 100 calories

Total: 460 calories

Everything seems right except the rice, 130 calories seems very low(and the portion size is 3 ounces).

While im not good with weights, it seems like a lot more than 3 ounces is put into their bowls, it seems more like 1 scoop is 130 calories and they seem to put around 2-3 scoops.

Anybody here know if Chipotle's numbers are way off? The Rice is the thing that seems off because you don't really know how much rice you're actually getting.

Anyway I'm going to be cautious and eat around 400-500 calories the rest of the day, that gives me around an 800 calorie window for the bowl.

I'm weight lifting tonight, im usually there for around 35 minutes so i figure ill burn around 50-100 calories as i have no idea how many calories you really burn weight lifting, but i try not to include those calories into my calorie count for the day.

[Dreamliner]

Hehe, probably not a bad idea to double the claimed calories when you eat out. As a general rule, if I know I'm going out to dinner, I precede the dinner with a 24 hr. fast, assuming that the restaurant meal is going to be so calorie-dense as to put me way over my daily requirements had I eaten lunch per usual.

[chrisleakfan4life]

Hehe, probably not a bad idea to double the claimed calories when you eat out. As a general rule, if I know I'm going out to dinner, I precede the dinner with a 24 hr. fast, assuming that the restaurant meal is going to be so calorie-dense as to put me way over my daily requirements had I eaten lunch per usual.

I don't eat it very often and when i do i try not to eat much else the rest of the day. I figure the bowl is around 800 calories as there are two other places who have bowls(Panda Express and another place) and for theirs its 640 calories and 720 calories.

I figure 800-900 is a reasonable estimate and i try to limited myself the rest of the day to around 400 calories.

I'll probably just end up having some sliced turkey or something tonight.

[Dreamliner]

I suspect you're spot-on. And so what if you overestimate ? Better than underestimating.

[fubar1]

The only thing I'd add is to stay away from Panda. It's entirely processed and the majority of their food is loaded with sugar, preservatives and oils.

There's definitely some unhealthy things to stay away from at Chipotle as well. The Pork, Barbacoa and Sour Cream are examples.

But at least their chicken is antibiotic free range chicken. And you have a much better shot at getting healthy calories there vs. Panda.

[Dreamliner]

'healthy calories'

*snickers*

No pun intended, but Snickers Bars are yummy as well and people should eat those too. I know I do.

[fubar1]

Believe it or not there are both healthy and unhealthy calories.

People who are overweight aren't that way solely due to eating too much.

[Dreamliner]

Believe it or not there are both healthy and unhealthy calories.

People who are overweight aren't that way solely due to eating too much.

We're not get much from you other than aphorisms, are we ?

People are overweight because they tend to consume more calories than they expend, regardless their food choices.

[swampbabe]

Back on topic, if you like the Burrito Bowls get the lettuce instead of the rice, get the chicken and fajita vegetables, three different salsas, and the guacamole (not a lot). Do not get the salad dressing, it has like a gajillion calories. You won't miss the rice.

[chrisleakfan4life]

Back on topic, if you like the Burrito Bowls get the lettuce instead of the rice, get the chicken and fajita vegetables, three different salsas, and the guacamole (not a lot). Do not get the salad dressing, it has like a gajillion calories. You won't miss the rice.


The rice is my favorite part and i don't care for their lettuce, i know the darker the better but i prefer ice berg lettuce.

Anyway i don't eat it very often and when i do i usually cut down the rest of the day, its sort of my "reward" for when i have a successful week of dieting.

Long term my "diet" may not be the healthiest and i will try to eat healthier, but i believe that if you want to lose weight you have to consume less than your body needs, basically its all math.

I'm not saying you eat a bunch of junk food but the key to any diet, to me, is having the will power to cut down calories and portion sizes but still eating the food you enjoy.

I think a lot of people fail diets because they try to eat foods they simply do not like. I cannot tolerate the crap places like Jenny Craig put out, i tried it when somebody i know was using them and it was disgusting.

[LeafUF]

CL, I prefer iceberg lettuce also, grew up on it, just cant get used to the other stuff.

Anyway, I dont see this as a big deal, you have a strategy that works for you and you are knowledgeable enough at this point to realize that maybe Chipotle is putting out a very generous estimate to their actual calories.

Now, what I would do if I were you, learn to make it at home. That way you can still enjoy the heck out of a favorite food and be certain of the cals you consume. Of course that doesnt mean giving up the fast food version entirely but it may give you a chance to enjoy it a little more often if you desire.

[LeafUF]

Oh and Panda is the ****. I know how bad it is and I still love that place. And I do not waste my time getting the bowls either, if I eat there its double orange chicken, veggie spring roll and chow mein. And a coke for good measure. If that meal is not 2000 calories on its own I would be shocked.

Note to people trying to lose weight: DO NOT EAT LIKE ME.

[Dreamliner]

Rice is not bad. Asians eats TONS of it and they're FAR leaner than we are.

Also, we beat up on iceberg lettuce too much. It has more of certain antioxidants than fresh spinach does!

[ajoseph]

Rice is not bad. Asians eats TONS of it and they're FAR leaner than we are.

Also, we beat up on iceberg lettuce too much. It has more of certain antioxidants than fresh spinach does!

"Rice" is not bad. What's terrible is the processed white crap that is served across this country. The rice is stripped of all of its nutrients, just like processed "white" bread. Natural rice (i.e., brown rice, or wild rice), which is what I imagine Asians consume, is good for you (and is a "whole" carb), in moderation.

"Junk food" rise does taste good. Pollo Tropical rice is awesome; it's just terrible for you. So when I eat it, I know I'm eating junk food.

[Dreamliner]

"Rice" is not bad. What's terrible is the processed white crap that is served across this country. The rice is stripped of all of its nutrients, just like processed "white" bread. Natural rice (i.e., brown rice, or wild rice), which is what I imagine Asians consume, is good for you (and is a "whole" carb), in moderation.

"Junk food" rise does taste good. Pollo Tropical rice is awesome; it's just terrible for you. So when I eat it, I know I'm eating junk food.

We're losing perspective. There are no 'terrible foods' (see: Reasons You Should Eat Sugar thread). Rather, we Americans in general have a terrible habit of eating too much. Both feeding frequency and daily calories have SOARED over the last few decades. Americans no longer eat food. They SHOVEL food. I just interviewed a man last night who conceded that he probably gets his daily caloric requirements JUST SNACKING, never mind his regularly scheduled meals.

[LeafUF]

Dream there is certainly a difference in how you prepare things though. And while overeating is the main problem you can have two equal portion sizes of rice that have different calories based on how they were prepared. Many places add fat to their rice during the cooking process which adds calories without increasing portion size.

Not that it makes it bad food, just that the same portion size can have higher calories than one cooked differently.

[Dreamliner]

Dream there is certainly a difference in how you prepare things though. And while overeating is the main problem you can have two equal portion sizes of rice that have different calories based on how they were prepared. Many places add fat to their rice during the cooking process which adds calories without increasing portion size.

Not that it makes it bad food, just that the same portion size can have higher calories than one cooked differently.

Certainly, but my point is that it all comes down to calories. And if calories need to be limited, as they do in order to lose weight, then you might as well include at least a bit of the foods you enjoy. I do, however, caution my trainees that the lower they go on food intake, certainly the less the margin of error, hence the need for some prudence as regards food choices.

You're going to eat them anyway, whether as a part of an intelligent eating strategy ... or on the rebound as a result of deprivation.

[Dreamliner]

And to go back to the man I interviewed last night. As he grew increasingly excited about losing the 60 pounds or so he'd like to lose, he began to pepper me with questions about the foods he could and couldn't eat. But since he eats three meals a day, and then consumes 1,000 or more calories a day snacking, I suggested that there are no 'forbidden foods' *at the meals*, provided he cuts out the snacking (which he acknowledges is purely emotional). So, in brief, as long as he restricts his eating to meals, it doesn't matter how he prepares his rice. The weight should fall off because in merely eliminating snacking he's already created an aggressive calorie deficit.

[LeafUF]

If he keeps the meals the same that is. No doubt cutting out a 1000 calories will lead to a drop off. So long as he doesnt cut out those snacks only to find a way to add 1000 calories into his three meals.

[ajoseph]

We're losing perspective. There are no 'terrible foods' (see: Reasons You Should Eat Sugar thread). Rather, we Americans in general have a terrible habit of eating too much. Both feeding frequency and daily calories have SOARED over the last few decades. Americans no longer eat food. They SHOVEL food. I just interviewed a man last night who conceded that he probably gets his daily caloric requirements JUST SNACKING, never mind his regularly scheduled meals.

That's a great point, although I really don't agree that there "are no terrible foods." Bluntly, I eat like a pig at my meals (twice a day) ... it's just me. I motabolize food quickly, and I try and stay active. So, I watch what I eat. I stringently monitor my carb intake (and eat a ton of salad). But if I steer off plan, my cholesterol levels are dramatically effected

[swampbabe]

Wow, lots of white rice lovers on this thread. LOL If you like the taste of Chipotle rice you can make your own by adding lime juice and chopped cilantro in at the end. It won't taste "exactly" like Chipotle because they saute their rice in oil before they add the liquid. I make this at home so that I can control the calories. They (and I) use basmati rice.

I do agree with you, Dream. You can eat what you want, in moderation. That's the whole basis of Weight Watchers.

[Dreamliner]

If he keeps the meals the same that is. No doubt cutting out a 1000 calories will lead to a drop off. So long as he doesnt cut out those snacks only to find a way to add 1000 calories into his three meals.

Yes, the operative phrase is always: "Without changing anything else."

But I should have mentioned that even the meals are going to be smaller. I'm putting him on The 'S' Diet. He gets to eat all the foods he enjoys, but on (S)maller plates, no (S)tacking food high and no (S)econds.

[Dreamliner]

That's a great point, although I really don't agree that there "are no terrible foods." Bluntly, I eat like a pig at my meals (twice a day) ... it's just me. I motabolize food quickly, and I try and stay active. So, I watch what I eat. I stringently monitor my carb intake (and eat a ton of salad). But if I steer off plan, my cholesterol levels are dramatically effected

Yes, but does 'steering off plan' translate to weight gain ? I ask because it seems to be the typical pattern for cholesterol to react to weight-gain/weight-loss regardless the foods eaten (including carb levels). Witness the recent 'Twinkie Diet' experiment in which the UK nutrition professor, believe his name is Haub, lost 27 pounds in ten weeks eating mostly sugary treats. His cholesterol numbers improved dramatically and across the board.

Please understand that I'm not stampeding people into eating foods they're not comfortable eating. I'm simply reacting to the dubious 'good foods vs. bad foods' notion that has people sadly depriving themselves (usually without success) of foods they truly enjoy.

Now, as to whether cholesterol readings even matter is another issue. I have noticed that upwards of 70% of heart attack victims had normal readings at the time.

[fubar1]

We're not get much from you other than aphorisms, are we ?

People are overweight because they tend to consume more calories than they expend, regardless their food choices.

Do you always rely on absolutes vs understanding things can be a little more nuanced?

[Dreamliner]

Do you always rely on absolutes vs understanding things can be a little more nuanced?

I thought that was your category, "bad foods", "evil food manufacturers", etc.

[ajoseph]

Yes, but does 'steering off plan' translate to weight gain ? I ask because it seems to be the typical pattern for cholesterol to react to weight-gain/weight-loss regardless the foods eaten (including carb levels). Witness the recent 'Twinkie Diet' experiment in which the UK nutrition professor, believe his name is Haub, lost 27 pounds in ten weeks eating mostly sugary treats. His cholesterol numbers improved dramatically and across the board.

Please understand that I'm not stampeding people into eating foods they're not comfortable eating. I'm simply reacting to the dubious 'good foods vs. bad foods' notion that has people sadly depriving themselves (usually without success) of foods they truly enjoy.

Now, as to whether cholesterol readings even matter is another issue. I have noticed that upwards of 70% of heart attack victims had normal readings at the time.

Steering off plan absolutely translates to weight gain (in inches if not pounds). It's why I am very cognizant of my eating patterns. I "cheat" on weekends only, where I am more active. On a related point, "cholesterol readings" is not strictly limited to cholesterol count; it is a breakdown of tryglicerides, hdl, LDL, etc. The studies I have read all seem to agree that these measurables absolutely matter.

[Dreamliner]

Steering off plan absolutely translates to weight gain (in inches if not pounds). It's why I am very cognizant of my eating patterns. I "cheat" on weekends only, where I am more active. On a related point, "cholesterol readings" is not strictly limited to cholesterol count; it is a breakdown of tryglicerides, hdl, LDL, etc. The studies I have read all seem to agree that these measurables absolutely matter.

Yes, I'm taking into account the breakdown. For example, a new study shows that increasing HDL doesn't seem to make much of a difference. The entire Blood Lipid Hypothesis is subject to question.

Also, I'm not a big fan of concepts like 'cheat days' or 'cheat meals' as they convey 'good foods vs. bad foods.' Now, if you are only using them to describe going over your accustomed caloric limit, that's another matter. Many report that they do fare better, at least with hunger control, when they vary their calorie intake from time to time.

[StrangeGator]

I was hitting Chipotle a lot when I first started my fitness and nutrition kick. First I did the bowls, then I switched to the salads. In the end, I figured out I was missing what I liked most about Chipotle and I went back to getting the full blown calorie bomb, the chicken burritos with just about everything. The difference was going once a week instead of three times a week.

There's a great fast food chain here in the Chicago area called Potbelly. They have very good food and it's an extremely slick brand experience, so I expect them to expand nationally. What I like about them is their online calorie calculator. I love their roast beef sandwich, but ordering it with the works is 670 calories. By opting for thin sliced bread, no oil, mayo or cheese, I get my sandwich down to 396 calories, and it's still a great sandwich. Just to be safe, I tell them to drain my peppers, which float in a an oil and vinegar mixture in the jar. I could eat at this place every day.

[LeafUF]

Potbelly isnt everywhere but they are in more than just the Chicago area. They have them all over DC. I agree its a great sandwich shop. It was actually the only tolerable one around DC at all.

[bakaduin]

The only thing I'd add is to stay away from Panda. It's entirely processed and the majority of their food is loaded with sugar, preservatives and oils.

There's definitely some unhealthy things to stay away from at Chipotle as well. The Pork, Barbacoa and Sour Cream are examples.

But at least their chicken is antibiotic free range chicken. And you have a much better shot at getting healthy calories there vs. Panda.

What is unhealthy about pork, shredded beef, and sour cream? I've got to side with Dream on this one. Calories is the main component. Free range is a load of nonsense.

[bakaduin]

Their website lists the calorie breakdown as:

Cilantro Lime rice: 130 calories
Chicken: 190 calories
Red Tomato Salsa: 40 calories
Cheese: 100 calories

Total: 460 calories

Everything seems right except the rice, 130 calories seems very low(and the portion size is 3 ounces).

While im not good with weights, it seems like a lot more than 3 ounces is put into their bowls, it seems more like 1 scoop is 130 calories and they seem to put around 2-3 scoops.


I think you are spot on that it has to do with the 3 oz. There are 8 oz in a cup and I would venture to bet that the typical bowl has anywhere from 1/2 a cup to a full cup of rice in it depending on the maker.

[StrangeGator]

Portion size and frequency are the issues with Chipotle. If you eat there more than once or twice a week, you should pay attention to what you order. Burrito Bols and salads are your best bet. If you eat there once a week or less, just go for broke. Otherwise, you don't really get your fix.

Crap. It's almost lunch and the Chipotle is only a block away. Look what I talked myself into. Maybe I can psyche myself into walking right past it on the way to Potbelly. Better, yet, I'll go the other way and walk home to make myself a tuna sandwich.

[LeafUF]

Ha, now I want to get Potbelly for lunch and Chipotle for dinner. But I am out west and Potbelly isn't an option.

What I am going to do is hit the gym then have a protein shake.