PORK SLOW COOKER SEASONING vs MCCORMICK
Nutrition comparison per 100 g serving
Ad 468x60
PORK SLOW COOKER SEASONING wins in 5 out of 8 nutrient categories
PORK SLOW COOKER SEASONING: 5
vs
MCCORMICK: 0
(3 ties)
Overview
| Nutrient | PORK SLOW COOKER SEASONING | MCCORMICK | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calories | 286 cal | 333 cal | |
| Protein | 14.3 g | 0 g | |
| Carbs | 57.1 g | 66.7 g | |
| Fat | 0 g | 0 g | Tie |
| Fiber | 0 g | 0 g | Tie |
| Sugar | 0 g | 0 g | Tie |
Minerals
| Mineral | PORK SLOW COOKER SEASONING | MCCORMICK | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calcium, Ca | 286 MG | 0 MG | |
| Sodium, Na | 10,571 MG | 8,333 MG |