Every macro figure on this site — calories, protein, carbohydrates, fat — carries the word "approx." printed next to it. That isn’t boilerplate legal hedging added as a precaution; it’s describing something real and specific about where each number comes from, and it’s worth explaining plainly rather than leaving it as fine print nobody actually reads or understands the reasoning behind.
Where the numbers actually come from
A plan’s published macro figure is the average across its dishes, which means the figure as a whole is only as reliable as the least-checked dish contributing to that average. Behind the scenes, each individual dish on a menu is either weighed and measured directly during kitchen testing — internally marked as verified — or estimated from the recipe and standard published ingredient nutrition data — marked as estimated — and a plan’s overall published macro figure reflects whatever mix of the two its current set of dishes actually carries at any given time.
Why we don’t quietly round up to "exact" once most dishes are checked
Because "most dishes verified" isn’t the same claim as "all dishes verified," and the honest answer to "is this figure exact?" is either genuinely yes for every single dish making up a plan’s average, or it isn’t — there’s no meaningful middle ground that actually deserves dropping the qualifier. A plan with ninety percent of its dishes weighed and ten percent still estimated is still, honestly, a plan with estimated figures contributing to its published number. "Approx." stays attached until that’s no longer true for every dish on that specific plan, not once it’s true for most of them.
What this means practically for how you use the number
If you’re tracking macros with genuine clinical or competitive precision — for a medical reason, or serious structured training — treat the published figure here as a reliable planning number rather than a laboratory-grade measurement, and build in roughly the same margin of uncertainty you’d reasonably apply to any packaged food’s printed nutrition label, which itself carries regulatory tolerance for variation. If you’re tracking more generally for everyday awareness rather than precision, the approx. figure is exactly as useful as it appears to be, without needing any adjustment.
Why we publish "approx." rather than not publishing a figure at all
Because most competing tiffin services publish no nutrition figure at all, checked or otherwise, and a transparently labelled estimate is genuinely more useful to a customer trying to plan around it than either a confident-sounding number with no indication of how it was actually arrived at, or no number whatsoever. The label is doing real, useful work — it’s not there to lower expectations, it’s there to describe the number accurately.
Every plan on this site lists its full rotation the same way, day by day, with these figures attached to each dish — the menus are readable without signing up.