OATMEAL DOESN’T HAVE TO TASTE BLAND

On Aug 15, 2:08 pm, Doug Freyburger wrote:
wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote:

Steel cut taste much better, are lower glycemic load

Is that really true abt lower glycemic load?

In every listing I've seen they have more fiber and less
digestible carb, so yes it's true. It's also my experience
that the same portion size is more filling and that also
suggests lower glycemic loads.

How does rolling them (smashing) make that higher?

I am not sure. My best guess is they are rolled and also
steamed. The partial cooking converts some amount of
fiber to digestible carb (that's one of the theories of why
fire for cooking was invented 2 million years ago).

Stores often have several levels of oatmeal - instant,
quick, regular rolled, steel-cut. Close closely at the carbs
listed on the labels for each type. The faster it cooks,
the more fiber got converted to digestible fiber. I think
that's from precooking though I'm not positive.

I'm not so sure it matters. Seems to me whether Quaker cooks the oats
or you do makes little difference. Perhaps rolling them even allows
them to cook faster. If there is any difference in fiber content (per
unit weight after cooking) I would be surprised. I'm still going to
try them. I see the steel cut are double the calories of rolled. I
assume this is because the rolled have more water before cooking.
Steel cut =150 cal per 1/4 cup while rolled have 150 cal per 1/2 cup.
I'm sure the steel are just more dense and weigh more per unit of
volume than the rolled. If they stay crunchy, it may be that they
aren't absorbing quite as much water by the time you eat them, but I
don't know if that matters. I doubt it. They probably get
supersaturated in your stomach after you eat them making them just as
loaded with water by the time they are digested. My thinking is that
the carbs are available even if you ate them raw and the fiber stays
the same no matter how much you cook them. I checked for them at
Walmart today and my store doesn't sell steel cut. I'll try another
store though. Crunchy sounds kind of interesting for a change. dkw

wrote in message
ups.com...

I'm not so sure it matters. Seems to me whether Quaker cooks the oats
or you do makes little difference. Perhaps rolling them even allows
them to cook faster. If there is any difference in fiber content (per
unit weight after cooking) I would be surprised. I'm still going to
try them. I see the steel cut are double the calories of rolled. I
assume this is because the rolled have more water before cooking.
Steel cut =150 cal per 1/4 cup while rolled have 150 cal per 1/2 cup.

The steel cut oats are very small and when you pour them in a measuring cup,
the cup is pretty much full of oats. The rolled oats are lighter and don't
pack as well. I haven't eaten rolled oats in awhile and don't recall what
volume you end up with after cooking one serving (1/2 cup). A 1/4 cup
serving of steel cut oats gets cooked with 1 cup of water, and so you end up
with about a cup of cooked cereal. I usually put 1 cup of oats to soak
overnight with 4 cups of water, although I often add a little extra water.
Bring the water to a boil first, add the oats, turn off the heat, cover and
let it sit overnight. In the morning, just heat & serve. Heating it takes
no more time than preparing rolled oats.

I'm sure the steel are just more dense and weigh more per unit of
volume than the rolled. If they stay crunchy, it may be that they
aren't absorbing quite as much water by the time you eat them, but I
don't know if that matters. I doubt it. They probably get
supersaturated in your stomach after you eat them making them just as
loaded with water by the time they are digested.

They are by no means crunchy, unless you undercook them. You let steel cut
oats soak overnight and you end up with a pot of nice, tender oatmeal that
still has way more body & texture than rolled oats.


My thinking is that
the carbs are available even if you ate them raw and the fiber stays
the same no matter how much you cook them. I checked for them at
Walmart today and my store doesn't sell steel cut. I'll try another
store though. Crunchy sounds kind of interesting for a change. dkw

If they're crunchy, you undercooked them. Most supermarkets carry them.
Look for a box or can that says Irish Oatmeal rather than steel cut. Same
thing. McCann's is the most common brand of Irish oatmeal.


--
Liz
HW:268 CW: 156.6 GW: 148

"Del Cecchi" wrote:
"Doug Freyburger" wrote:
wrote:

I like steel cut oats as well.... but are they
nutritionally any better than regular and cheaper
rolled oats?

They are lower glycemic load, so more of their fiber is
intact

See the authoritative list at
http://www.mendosa.com/gilists.htm

Which doesn't list steel cut oats. Nice enough resource for
other discussions, though.

"Doug Freyburger" wrote in message
ups.com...
"Del Cecchi" wrote:
"Doug Freyburger" wrote:
wrote:

I like steel cut oats as well.... but are they
nutritionally any better than regular and cheaper
rolled oats?

They are lower glycemic load, so more of their fiber is
intact

See the authoritative list at
http://www.mendosa.com/gilists.htm

Which doesn't list steel cut oats. Nice enough resource for
other discussions, though.

If you were intellectually honest and looked around you would come to the
conclusion that oats is oats. whole, cut with steel, or rolled are the
same from a nutritional standpoint

On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 16:34:01 -0700, wrote:

On Aug 14, 4:12 pm, Cynthia P wrote:
On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 01:14:34 -0400, Elizabeth Blake wrote:
wrote in message
...
"Elizabeth Blake"
wrote:

I prefer steel cut oats

They are expensive tho!

I've seen them for about $1/pound in bulk bins at health food stores!

Yep, I bought the expensive kind in the can at first... but since have
gravitated to either Bob's Red Mill or the health food store. MUCH
cheaper!

--
Cynthia
262/227/152

I'll try the steel cut oats. I like whatever the other kind is called
so well though, it is unlikely I'll want to change. dkw


I think with me, the regular rolled oats were just too mushy... the
steel cut give a nice texture and that's the kind of thing I'm fussy
about. They do take longer to cook... but hubby, who also loves the
regular rolled oats, thinks they are better than the rolled oats. But
it might just be the blueberries I often fix them with that attracts
him, LOL!

--
Cynthia
262/230/152

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:44:55 -0700, Doug Freyburger wrote:

bonjella wrote:

Steelcut? I assume these are oats... that are cut with steal?

Whole grain oats are chopped with steel blades to open them
up so they expand when boiled. Out of the can these look
like tiny little pellets.

I'm interested now :-) How do other oats get cut?

Other oats get rolled not cut. They are smashed flat so they
expand when boiled. These are the flakes many people are
used to.

Steel cut taste much better, are lower glycemic load, take
much longer to cook, don't have an instant version that I've
ever seen.


Well, it's not all that long to cook them... 20 minutes or so will do
it. There's also a method of starting them and leaving them overnight,
but I haven't tried that.

--
Cynthia
262/229/152