Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked vs Turkey, whole, breast, meat only, cooked, roasted
Nutrition comparison per 100g
🏆
Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked
2 wins
🏆
Turkey, whole, breast, meat only, cooked, roasted
6 wins
| Nutrient | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked | Turkey, whole, breast, meat only, cooked, roasted | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calories | 674 kcal | 147 kcal ★ | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked has 359% more |
| Protein | 5.24 g | 30.13 g ★ | Turkey, whole, breast, meat only, cooked, roasted has 83% more |
| Carbs | 0.62 g ★ | 0 g | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked has 0% more |
| Fat | 72.28 g | 2.08 g ★ | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked has 3375% more |
| Sodium | 43 mg ★ | 99 mg | Turkey, whole, breast, meat only, cooked, roasted has 57% more |
| Calcium | 6 mg | 9 mg ★ | Turkey, whole, breast, meat only, cooked, roasted has 33% more |
| Iron | 0.7 mg | 0.71 mg ★ | Turkey, whole, breast, meat only, cooked, roasted has 1% more |
| Potassium | 164 mg | 249 mg ★ | Turkey, whole, breast, meat only, cooked, roasted has 34% more |
Compare Food Groups
Compare whole food groups for a cleaner, averaged breakdown.