Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked vs Milk, whole, 3.25% milkfat, with added vitamin D
Nutrition comparison per 100g
🏆
Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked
5 wins
🏆
Milk, whole, 3.25% milkfat, with added vitamin D
4 wins
| Nutrient | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked | Milk, whole, 3.25% milkfat, with added vitamin D | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calories | 674 kcal | 61 kcal ★ | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked has 1005% more |
| Protein | 5.24 g ★ | 3.15 g | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked has 66% more |
| Carbs | 0.62 g | 4.8 g ★ | Milk, whole, 3.25% milkfat, with added vitamin D has 87% more |
| Fat | 72.28 g | 3.25 g ★ | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked has 2124% more |
| Sugar | 0 g ★ | 5.05 g | Milk, whole, 3.25% milkfat, with added vitamin D has 100% more |
| Sodium | 43 mg ★ | 43 mg | Equal |
| Calcium | 6 mg | 113 mg ★ | Milk, whole, 3.25% milkfat, with added vitamin D has 95% more |
| Iron | 0.7 mg ★ | 0.03 mg | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked has 2233% more |
| Potassium | 164 mg ★ | 132 mg | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked has 24% more |
Compare Food Groups
Compare whole food groups for a cleaner, averaged breakdown.